3 Reasons Change Initiatives Fail — and How to Ensure Yours Succeeds

When a major U.S.-based financial institution needed help with an organization-wide transformation, they turned to Debora, a seasoned executive coach and change consultant. The institution was grappling with technological disruption, shifting customer expectations, and mounting regulatory pressures, and they viewed their transformation program as the natural solution to these challenges.

Upon arrival, Debora spent time talking with employees across all levels, many of whom described their post-transformation workplace in a negative light, using such terms as “war room” and “Hunger Games.” The findings from a recent company pulse survey reinforced what she had heard: Although employees understood why change was needed, they felt they were already stretched too thin to take on any new initiatives.

Debora had arrived ready to coordinate initiatives across the organization’s existing transformation program. But she soon realized that a more fundamental change was in order: The company’s program needed a set of strategies that could be tailored to each department’s specific challenges and constraints. Without such tailoring, even sound transformation initiatives might falter or backfire.

Related Article: Driving Change: Essential Steps for Successful HR Transformation

We are human resources strategy advisers and professors who have studied transformations across industries for more than 15 years, and we have designed a five-step process to drive successful transformation initiatives. In this article, we’ll briefly sum up the process.

Aligning Strategies and Motivation Styles

Many leaders attempting transformation initiatives fail in three ways:

1. First, they don’t clearly define the type of change their organization or departments are facing, which means they can’t clearly define their specific objectives.

2. Second, they often apply a one-size-fits-all strategy to their situation and don’t assess what sort of balance it calls for between exploration (innovating and risk-taking) and exploitation (optimizing existing processes).

3. And third, they don’t consider who will drive the change and how employees’ differing skills and readiness for change will affect success.

Our research has revealed that underlying these failures lies a crucial factor: Motivation styles are the hidden drivers of change initiatives. Building on the work of Heidi Grant and E. Tory Higgins and their article “Do You Play to Win — or to Not Lose?” we’ve identified three key styles:

1. Play to Win (thriving on growth and opportunity).
2. Play Not to Lose (valuing stability and caution).
3. Balanced (seeking the middle ground). 

These styles aren’t merely about skills — they reflect how employees are inherently wired for change.

Aligning change strategies with employee motivation styles is crucial for success.

Well-intentioned change initiatives fail when organizations rush into one-size-fits-all transformations without understanding who they’re asking to change and why. 

1. Diagnose Your Change Type

Before launching a change initiative, determine whether you need to focus on exploration or exploitation. Different change types require different adaptive behaviors.

Some departments need a strategy of exploration (especially those facing digital disruptions, which demand innovation), while others needed one of exploitation (especially those hoping to optimize existing processes to meet regulations and deliver quality service).

For each department, start by using a decision tree to lay out your needs for radical and incremental change. Next, explore the potential risks of focusing solely on exploration or exploitation for each change theme. This process helps reveal blind spots and guides you toward a balanced, tailored approach.

2. Map Motivational Styles

With your change type identified, the next step is to map out your employees’ motivational styles. When we did this at Debora’s financial institution, we found the following overall distribution: Play to Win (45%), Play Not to Lose (40%), and Balancers (15%).

When working on this task, pay close attention to how team members approach tasks and challenges. Do they focus on potential gains, moving quickly toward solutions? Or do they prioritize avoiding mistakes, taking a more cautious, methodical approach?

Podcast: How to Lead Digital Transformation in the Age of Emerging Tech

3. Match Motivations to Initiatives

With a clear understanding of both your change type and the motivational styles of the employees on your teams, you can now strategically assign employees to projects that align with their natural tendencies.

In the case of Debora’s financial institution, we matched Play to Win employees with exploratory projects that involved the development of new financial products, and we matched Play Not to Lose employees with projects focused on regulatory compliance and risk management. Not surprisingly, we placed Balancers in roles that required both innovation and careful execution.

4. Tailor Your Change Messaging

Effective communication about change also isn’t one-size-fits-all. Tailor it to resonate with different motivational styles. At Debora’s financial institution, we coached leaders to frame changes differently across departments, depending on their dominant styles. Examples include:

• “With this new platform, we’ll lead the market by offering innovative services and products that our competitors can’t match, positioning us as a front-runner in the industry” (Play to Win).
• “If we don’t implement these changes, we risk falling out of compliance, losing our trusted position with regulators and clients and endangering our reputation and long-term security” (Play Not to Lose). 
• “This transformation will enable us to innovate and stay competitive, while also maintaining the operational security and regulatory compliance that we depend on” (Balancers).

5. Encourage a Paradox Mindset.

Even with the best alignment between change types and motivational styles, organizations will inevitably face situations where contradictory goals must be pursued simultaneously. Encouraging a paradox mindset — so that employees get comfortable in that zone of contradiction — is crucial for sustained adaptability. 

Debora applied this approach in the customer experience division of the financial institution she was working with, which needed to innovate to improve customer relationships but also had to implement strict cost controls. She was able to foster a paradox mindset in the division by designing projects that balanced opposing objectives — and by then encouraging open discussions about the inherent tensions that arise. Leaders should model this approach, navigating competing demands transparently. Regular team reflections on these practices reinforce the mindset across the organization.

Toolkit: Managing Organizational Change

For years, organizations have chased the perfect transformation plan, yet often they keep failing. The pattern is clear: Well-intentioned change initiatives fail when organizations rush into one-size-fits-all transformations without understanding who they’re asking to change and why. Our research and Debora’s implementation of our five-step process show that success comes from understanding exactly what type of change each department needs and how their employees are wired to deliver it. It is not about the perfect strategy but about making change fit your people, who are the ones who will make it happen.

Nicolas T. Deuschel is a professor at Carlos III University and adjunct professor at IE Business School. Robert Langan is an assistant professor of management at Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada. Carlos Rodríguez Gómez-Rico is an investment analyst at Iberdrola. c.2024 Harvard Business School Publishing Corp. Distributed by New York Times Licensing.