I generally meet extremely few leaders who are against a growth mindset. In fact, they are all for it. But the practice is different. The conviction is there, only it is not so easy to create a growth mindset. Most organizations still have a long way to go here.
This year we reveal the 5 keys to behavior change (Behavioural Change Keys). In this article, we discuss one of the keys: Growth Mindset. It is also the first theme this year that we put at the center of our community activities, podcasts and publications. Why really? After all, Growth Mindset is a (long) known concept! In practice we see many good intentions, but in practice fixed mindsets dominate: risk aversion, fear of making mistakes, reluctance to experiment, sticking to familiar routines, fixation on an end result and so on.
Wrong assumptions
Questions related to behavioral change are the most common in the practice of strategy and organizational development, and also crucial to achieving success and actually realizing a vision or direction. Not for nothing is the most frequently asked question by many leaders: How do we ensure that the "vision on paper" is brought to life in the daily work and behavior of employees?
To my great surprise, outdated Behavioural Change models or, even worse, implicit assumptions and beliefs about behavior change, based solely on a rational/instrumental view of human behavior, still apply in this context. One of the most widely used Behavioural Change models is the Knowledge-Attitude-Behaviour (KAB) model from cognitive psychology. The central idea is that the process of behavior change is gradual through knowledge accumulation and transfer, leading to a change in attitude and then behavior modification.
"It's all right on paper, but how do we get it into people's behavior and mindset?"
Practice
Apply this for a moment to a desired change, say from an unhealthy lifestyle to a healthy one, and you immediately know what I mean to say. The KAB approach then is: start informing people about the benefits of a healthy lifestyle; live longer and healthier, less chance of chronic diseases such as diabetes and cardiovascular disease, no obesity, less chance of cancer, more vitality etcetera. Then the reasoning is that based on all this information people will change their attitude (e.g. become advocates of not smoking or of healthy eating, exercise more...) and that this in turn will lead to the desired behavioral change (stop smoking, eat unhealthily or start exercising). If only it were that simple, I hear many think. And yet we very often apply this to desired behavior change in organizations.
Equally unsubtle, but perhaps (partially) recognizable to everyone: a new vision is being written by some smart, analytical strategists or visionaries, perhaps a company purpose; it is approved - with some adjustments - by the management and RVB and then rolled out, cascaded, throughout the organization. Including a festive event and an internal communication campaign, in which the new values are also "explained. With a nice gadget - a nice coffee or tea mug or something else - as a reminder.
So that's not how it works. Human nature does not work like a machine, where a push of a button produces a certain action. Fokke and Sukke have a hilarious cartoon about this: while they are planning, so does Sukke's question about the culture change: "It's Thursday the 17th at 3:30 p.m.," Fokke replies very soberly.
I am constantly reminded of this in conversations where the struggle is, "It's all right on paper, but how do we get it into people's behavior and mindset?"
Growth Mindset
More on behavior change will follow later this year. But first, we grab one of the important five keys: the importance of a growth mindset. It was American psychologist Carol Dweck, professor of psychology at Stanford University, who was the founder of mindset thinking in personal development, intelligence and mining human potential. According to Dweck, two mindsets exist in opposition to each other: a static (fixed) mindset and a growth-oriented (growth) mindset. People and organizations with a static mindset are focused on confirming and maintaining what they are capable of (intelligence, competencies, skills, identity, way of working...). Everything is focused on (continuing) success, getting approval, acceptance and appearing smart. One is focused on avoiding failure, being rejected, taking risks and experimenting. Feedback is experienced as threatening, leaving little room for making mistakes.
The growth mindset is characterized by the idea that every individual or organization can develop on an ongoing basis (intelligence, talent, competencies, identity...), which quickly leads to a learning mindset. Setbacks or failures are seen as learning opportunities to grow. Feedback and criticism are also sources of learning and development. Trying new things, failing and persevering to get better lead to a culture of growth, innovation and creation. Achieving success leads to inspiration and motivation for others.
And back to practice
I meet extremely few leaders who are against a growth mindset. In fact, they are all in favor. But so the practice is different. So the conviction is there, only it is not so easy to create a growth mindset. Most organizations still have a long way to go here. Often because the leaders are not aware that they also have to live this (e.g. make mistakes, show vulnerability, don't always know, ask curious questions...), but often also because we like to count ourselves 'rich' when it comes to the culture of the organization: people are very passionate and focused on success...
Fortunately, there is more awareness in this area. More and more, we receive questions about interventions aimed at developing more openness, curiosity and vulnerability. And on stimulating more involvement and engagement, for example by providing space to connect one's own purpose and values with those of the organization.
Human adaptability
The growth mindset almost automatically brings us to the most important question: is man actually "capable of change," and thus is it at all possible to be allowed to rely on it? Many are skeptical or even cynical about this. And this belief also influences our thinking: we all know the stories about people or departments that would be unwilling to change. There are also all sorts of theories that claim that human beings are focused on preservation, i.e., conservatism.
I find encouraging and encouraging the work of Roel Verheul in this regard. I spoke to him recently about his findings. In his latest book (Homo Plasticus) he makes a warm plea about the human ability to adapt and change. Man turns out to be much more plastic than previously thought. In his book, Verheul refutes the myths of the immutable human being, namely that man would be characterized by a static nature, disposition and personality. Based on recent scientific insights, he reaches opposite conclusions:
- Myth 1 - static human nature: Our essence lies in our adaptability with which we are constantly responding to the context, which by definition is not an immutable trait. In short: we are born adapters.
- Myth 2 - static predisposition: Our genes are expressed in complex interactions with the environment. Traits such as intelligence, aptitude and competence are by no means under direct genetic control. In short, we largely determine who we become.
- Myth 3 - static personality: Our personality changes flexibly with successive phases of life and circumstances and thus is not set in stone. In short, we potentially possess a high degree of behavioral flexibility.
On that note, we at Fresh Forward have also been privileged witnesses to the changeability of people and organizations for more than 20 years. Inciting, stimulating and fueling the desire in people and in organizations is essential here. Change then arises naturally. Desire is a powerful driver of progress, development and behavioral change from intrinsic motivation. A second key has already been revealed (oops). But that was no longer a secret to the people who have already worked with us!
Jempi Moens, Founding Partner and Chief Imagination Officer
