Key Points:
The content and delivery of a leader's change message impacts employee commitment differently in contexts of job security vs. insecurity
When jobs are secure, emotional message content and strong delivery lead to higher commitment
When jobs are insecure, rational message content is more effective and delivery style matters less
Understanding these differences supports leaders to tailor change communication for greater impact
While there is consistent advice about what makes for good change communication it can be overly generalized. Recent experiments led by Secil Bayraktar and Hayat Kabasakal address this issue, by shedding new light on the nuances of change communication when jobs are threatened.
In this study, they investigated how different aspects of change communication impact commitment to change. Change commitment is often defined as mindset that reflects a persons belief in the necessity of the change and their willingness to be a part of implementing teh change effort.
These researchers were specifically interested in the influences of emotional versus rational change messages and strong and weak delivery style, when jobs were and weren’t threatened by the organizational change.
Job insecurity was described in the study as leaders who hoped, but could not guarantee there would be no layoffs, and in which significant shifts to job descriptions were expected. So, these finding relate to not simply job loss but also major adjustments to core job tasks and responsibilities.
Tailoring change messages to specific situations makes a difference
Some findings worth noting results from this study, including:
When employees feel their jobs are secure, emotional message content focusing on the positive vision and outcomes of change, delivered in an enthusiastic style, generated the highest commitment. The researchers advise using metaphors, personal stories and inspirational appeals in such situations.
However, when job insecurity was high, rational message content providing facts, logical arguments and detailed information was more effective for fostering commitment. In these contexts, delivery style mattered less.
What might explain these findings?
In short, when job insecurity is at play people likely pay more attention to what leaders are saying. They search for information to increase their sense of control, develop job preservations strategies, or simply to reduce the discomfort of uncertainty.
Tips for applying these findings in your organizational change
As change leaders, it pays to diagnose our context and adapt our messaging accordingly. Things to consider:
• Assess perceptions job security by checking in with key stakeholders and monitoring the organizational grapevine. Mitigate rumors about job risks through timely, consistent , and transparent communication.
• Dial up rational content (e.g. relevant facts, figures, logical arguments) when planning communications in insecure environments. Take time to highlight specifics about the change process and impacts of the change. Worry more getting the messages right, and less about delivery.
• Double down on emotional appeals (e.g. vivid imagery, powerful anecdotes, shared purpose and values) and dynamic delivery in stable settings. Executives and sponsors who struggle with presenting to groups effectively may benefit from support and coaching to increase the impact of their communication efforts.
• Solicit feedback on draft communications from diverse stakeholders to pressure-test your approach.
What insights might this study offer for organizations for Artificial Intelligence (AI) implementation?
According to recent polls, concerns are growing about AI in general and its impact on jobs. 2023 data from PEW suggests that 52% Americans report feeling more concerned than excited about AI, up from 38% in 2022. Also in 2023, IPSOS found that, globally, 56% of respondents believed that AI would change how they did their job in the next five years, although only 36% felt it was likely that AI would replace their jobs in that time period.
This suggests that those of us engaging with employees around the implementation of AI should account for the likelihood that some staff may be feeling nervous and concerned about AI’s impacts that their jobs. Consider using the tips above to help balance big picture, blue sky visions about the future of AI, with at least some nuts and bolts details about the impacts AI is likely to have on your employees and staff now.
Why should we trust these findings?
The research has several methodological strengths increasing our confidence in the results:
The study used an experimental design, the gold standard for identifying cause-and-effect relationships. Participants were randomly assigned to different change scenarios, a technique that yields high internal validity.
Rather than focusing on students, as is common in such research, the sample consisted of 200 professionals who had experienced at least one organizational change. This makes the findings more generalizable.
The vignettes describing organizational changes in the experiments were carefully designed and validated by experts and in a pilot study to ensure realism.
The bottom line
Tailoring your communication strategy to your unique change context is key to winning hearts and minds. By leveraging insights from this research, you can ensure your change message hits the mark when it matters most.
References
Bayraktar, S., & Kabasakal, H. (2022). Crafting a change message and delivering it with success: An experimental study. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 58(1), 97-119.
Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence. (n.d.-b). AI Index Report 2024 – artificial intelligence index. Stanford University | AI Index. https://aiindex.stanford.edu/report/