Episode 4: Unknown unknowns: Change management, uncertainty and group identity
- Julian King
- Jan 19, 2024
- 9 min read
Updated: Jan 22, 2024
Should change be the new constant? This is a mantra around some workplaces but the perceived threat that comes with some (not all) proposed changes sends people retreating into their groups or teams. This episode looks at the role psychological uncertainty plays in workplace change. Particularly what we do to reduce the uncertainty and what managers and leaders can do to obtain support for a proposed change.
This is episode four in a series looking at the research related to groups and how they influence individual behaviour at work. We’ve been using the Robbers Cave experiment as an illustration of some of the concepts. The previous episodes can be found here:
Some of the key points from previous episodes were:
A workplace clique can become a barrier to effective information flow, knowledge creation and problem solving
Building trust can bring groups together and break down cliques
Individuals can fulfill the role of trust builder between groups, particularly if they aren’t aligned to either group. These connector roles are more effective by people who can be discrete and are good at monitoring their own behaviour
Three elements of trust include competency, consistency and benevolence
We are biased against other groups by assessing them as insincere and we will downgrade their performance even though objective data says otherwise
We can drop our usual moral standards to support our group or team, mostly justifying our actions by claiming they are for “the greater good”.
The need for certainty
One of our critical needs in work, and life, is certainty (Kruglanski & Orehek, 2011). For example we like a degree of certainty about what’s going to happen, how we will be treated by others and how we see ourselves. One research paper describes it well (Smith et. al. 2007):
“Because uncertainty undermines our confidence in how to behave and what to expect from our physical and social environment. We have a fundamental need to reduce feelings of uncertainty about our world and our place within it”
The opposite of certainty, believe it or not, is uncertainty and we naturally behave to reduce any uncertainty we experience.
Based on research, uncertainty can be generated from (Zheng, 2019):
the external environment (e.g. physical, social, economic)
interpersonal relationships and specifically the inability to predict the attitudes and behaviors of the other person
challenge to our status or identity (the work we do, how we see ourselves and our role and contribution to the world)
not enough, or too much, information (Ref) .
When it comes to our sense of identity there are a number of ways uncertainty appears to challenge us in the workplace. Such as:
Am I good at my job? (everyone else seems to know what they’re doing)
Do I belong here?
Where do I, or the team, fit in the future of this organisation?
Stress and uncertainty
The problem with uncertainty is that it raises our stress response and stimulates the amygdala (Peters et. al. 2017). Sometimes we are not able to predict what will happen in a particular situation and we’ll be questioning ourselves: Will I keep my job? Will I have enough money to pay the bills? Will people like and accept me?. And then there are the big life questions such as Who am I? Why am I here and where do I belong? These questions can be the source of stress and when this stress turns chronic it increases our risk of depression, heart attack and stroke (Peters et. al., 2017).
The stress also impairs our thinking which can lead to a vicious cycle of trying to predict what’s going to happen. Our stress induced decision making causes us to make errors, which increases our stress even more and the cycle continues. Clearly uncertainty is not helpful to our well being, health and functioning.
Groups help reduce uncertainty
We often respond to ambiguous situations by trying to reduce uncertainty any way we can. Some of us cope better with mystery and surprise and even crave it. This is referred to as tolerance of ambiguity, which varies for each individual (O’Connor et.al., 2022). But the brain is often described as a ‘prediction machine’ (Clark, 2013), always trying to anticipate what is coming so we can be prepared. We like to know that when we drive through a green traffic light, those that are sitting at a red light will remain stationery. The more we can rely on how things are going to turn out, the happier, safer and less stressed we are.
When we encounter uncertainty about ourselves (Who am I? What am I doing here?), we will identify more strongly with groups (Choi and Hogg, 2019). This is one of the more effective ways to reduce the uncertainty we feel about ourselves. When we are part of a well defined group we understand how we are supposed to behave, how others in the group will behave and our place in the organisation (Hogg et. al, 2004). Groups help confirm how we should act, think and feel.
If the world becomes a little more chaotic and uncertain, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic, we have a greater desire to identify with our groups (Abrams, 2021). It’s one of the actions we use to satisfy our need for certainty. Groups help to clarify what we stand for and what discerns us from others and also give us a sense of belonging.
Work teams are no different, part of our identity is tied up in the work we do and the team and organisation we are part of. During organisational restructures many doubts occur within the minds of staff who are affected by the change. The solidarity and structure provided by work teams can reinforce our work identity and reduce uncertainty and hence stress. Our attachment to our team also has a significant influence on whether we support a proposed change or not.
Managing change and uncertainty
Uncertainty is unavoidable, and for organisations the external environment changes all the time, so it makes sense that we have to make changes. How do we reduce uncertainty within a workplace, while making the changes that need to be made? One of the more effective ways to motivate staff is through a strong workplace culture and specifically by establishing work group/team identity.
When staff align themselves to the group identity, particularly during change, they naturally follow the behavioural norms and seek validation from the group. This validation (e.g. “that was great, you’re really starting to become part of the team.”) can strengthen and reinforce alignment to the group. The resulting adherence to group norms can lead to positive (e.g. co-operating with colleagues) or negative behaviours (e.g. ignoring policies and procedures if it’s in the interest of the group). The clearer the group identity, the stronger the group identification for those that are feeling a level of uncertainty (Choi and Hogg, 2019; Hogg, 2014).
A study into the role identity plays in workplace change, lead by Merlijn Venus, Assistant Professor at the University of Amsterdam found that threats to identity can lead to staff resisting change. The researchers concluded that:
“Unlike engaging in strategies that are commonly suggested in the literature, such as creating a dissatisfaction with the status quo, and consequently, a need for change (e.g., Kotter, 1995), and portraying change as highly attractive (e.g., Conger & Kanungo, 1998), managers ought to emphasize also that which is not going to change. ” (Venus et. al., 2018).
So decide what isn't going to change and reassure staff that this is the case. We've all been part of changes where information has been lacking, so the gossip and speculation starts. This is just a way to fill the information gaps and create some certainty out of the chaos.
Workplace change can be seen as a threat to this stability and in particular a threat to who we are. A seemingly small request like asking a team to move floors away from the executive team can be seen as a demotion in status and therefore the team will be asking themselves; Are we still considered useful? Are we important? It isn’t just the material changes that challenge us, it's also the meaning we derive from these changes.
Whatever changes are requested or made, it’s important for leaders to emphasise that the aspects of the organisational identity (i.e values) will remain the same and then act in accordance with those values. I’ve lost count of the number of times a staff member or work team found out they are no longer part of an organisation’s plans when they noticed they were not on the organisational chart any more. All these organisations had respect or integrity as a value. While it’s important for the organisation to emphasise the continuity of values and identity, it must continue to behave in line with these values or risk losing trust from employees.
A clear identity reduces uncertainty
To manage change effectively, leaders can reassure staff that the identity that is aligned with their work will stay the same (Venus et. al., 2018). Having a clear social identity (i.e the role we play in society and how we are seen by others) is an effective way to reduce the uncertainty brought on by change and for many people part of their identity is based on their work (i.e. “I’m a nurse and I love to help people”).
If staff are retreating into their groups to get comfort from an uncertain climate, we need to make sure that teams stand for the values, behaviours and standards we expect across the organisation. If you’ve been reading this series you’ll be getting the idea that group norms and culture have a big influence on individual behaviour. A recently published study by researchers from Sapienza University of Rome and Rice University, Texas found that teams are more influential in driving organisational behaviour than the broader organisation. How closely an individual identified with their work unit or team was a better predictor of both positive and negative behaviours (Pugliese et. al., 2023).
We’ll get back to the Eagles and Rattlers next week and find out what brought them together and the implications this has for managing groups in the workplace.
Summary and Practical implications
While the advice in the past has been to look for the positives and opportunities in a change, this may not be the best way to gain support for a change.
Decide what is not going to change and communicate this
Managers and leaders need to understand how staff perceive the organisation’s identity and the confirm that ‘who we are as a collective’, will continue (Venus et. al., 2019)
Ensure processes associated with the changes are considered to be fair, this reduces uncertainty and increases prosocial behaviours (Thau et. al. 2007)
Assume smaller work teams are influential in motivating postive behaviours. Ensure any change initiatives are managed on the work team/unit level, as well as at the organisational level. This may mean committees or change ‘champions’ that work at the team or unit level
Encourage all teams to have a plan and a purpose or mission statement that aligns with the broader organisational purpose and values. This ensures when individuals align closely with their team they will also identify with the organisation’s values, purpose and goals
Messages regarding change should make connections with the past and the future and a continuity of core values and practices. Leaders then have to behave in accordance with these values and practices.
References
Choi, E. U., & Hogg, M. A. (2019). Self-uncertainty and group identification: A meta-analysis. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 23(4), 483-501. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430219846990
Clark A. (2013) Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 36(3):181-204. doi:10.1017/S0140525X12000477
Hogg, M. A., Abrams, D., Otten, S., & Hinkle, S. (2004). The social identity perspective: Intergroup relations, self-conception, and small groups. Small Group Research, 35(3), 246–276. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496404263424
Hogg, M. A. (2014). From Uncertainty to Extremism: Social Categorization and Identity Processes. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(5), 338-342. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414540168
Kruglanski, A., & Orehek, E. (2011). The Need for Certainty as a Psychological Nexus for Individuals and Society. 10.1002/9781444344073.ch1.
O’Connor, P. J., Jimmieson, N. L., Bergin, A. J., Wiewiora, A., & McColl, L. (2022). Leader Tolerance of Ambiguity: Implications for Follower Performance Outcomes in High and Low Ambiguous Work Situations. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 58(1), 65-96. https://doi.org/10.1177/00218863211053676
Peters, A., McEwen, B.S., Friston, K. (2017) Uncertainty and stress: Why it causes diseases and how it is mastered by the brain, Progress in Neurobiology, Volume 156,
2017, Pages 164-188, ISSN 0301-0082, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pneurobio.2017.05.004.
Pugliese,E., Bonaiuto, M., Livi,S., Theodorou, A.,& van Knippenberg,D. (2023).Team identification more than organizational identification predicts counter productive work behavior and organizational citizenship behavior and mediates influence of communication climate and perceived external prestige. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,1–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.13017
Smith J.R., Hogg M.A., Martin R., & Terry D.J. (2007) Uncertainty and the influence of group norms in the attitude-behaviour relationship. Br J Soc Psychol. 2007 Dec;46(Pt 4):769-92. doi: 10.1348/014466606X164439. PMID: 18062848.
Thau, S., Aquino, K., & Wittek, R. (2007). An extension of uncertainty management theory to the self: The relationship between justice, social comparison orientation, and antisocial work behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 250-258. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.250
Venus, M., Stam, D., & Knippenberg, Daan. (2018). Visions of Change as Visions of Continuity. Academy of Management Journal. 62. 10.5465/amj.2015.1196.
Zheng, Y., Graham, L., Farh, J.L. et al. (2019) The impact of authoritarian leadership on ethical voice: a moderated mediation model of felt uncertainty and leader benevolence. Journal of Business Ethics. ISSN 0167-4544
Comments