Have you ever been weighed down by negative energy at work? Not too long ago, I was working with a highly creative organisation that had announced a merger. Sitting with employees who had just received the news, I couldn’t help but sense a mass of nervous, negative energy swirling around the room and being channelled into criticism, complaints and resentment. The employees were experiencing significant uncertainty. With little information to hook onto, their reaction was highly emotional, which resulting in a deflated, demotivated and unproductive workforce. This negative energy impacted everyone in that room.

The energy coming from a group is indicated by the noise levels in a team or the level of interaction. Energy levels can be high or low and even when high, this energy can be positive or negative. With change, periods of high negative and low energy are inevitable. High negative energy can be a healthy part of team work as any conflicts are allowed to surface, which can then be tackled. However, whether you’ve got a high-energy response with multiple conflicts surfacing everywhere, or a flat, low-energy response – converting this into positive team energy is not easy.

There are many models and theories out there that explore how we might manage this.

The Kubler-Ross change curve is a good example. Simply translated, this model suggests that organisational change is an emotional time for all of us. But as well as being emotional (however conscious or unconscious), our responses to change either trigger or block our energy.

The Kubler-Ross curve is taken from clinical psychology and studies the psychology of experiencing death and transition. We know that emotions affect our energy and productivity levels, an example of which is depression, which gives us a sense of hopelessness that translates into energy loss. A key indicator that this is a clinical depression is a loss of energy so great that it blocks the sufferer’s ability to engage in daily activities. Whilst rarely being of clinical proportions, significant losses and explosions of energy can have big implications in the workplace. The impact of change on energy levels and productivity is more complex than we might believe.

We know that a dip in productivity is generally associated with change, but this is not as simple as saying demotivated staff becoming less productive. Some staff may be less productive as they feel low and demotivated by change. Others, however, may be less productive for other reasons. They may, for example, experience a lot of negative energy towards change. I witnessed this during a ‘regime change’ in my last organisation, where there was little communication to reduce the uncertainty. While some were demotivated, distracted by their concerns and disengaged from their work, others were powerfully engaged in the change, expressing their anger through confrontational discussions with their manager, venting their frustrations about the new processes. Unfortunately, they weren’t given the information to understand the change or opportunity to input to it.

Our responses to changes are very individual. These differences often relate to the different ways that we like to use our energy, and play a big part in how we are perceived and what our impact is on others. So can you really  ‘manage’ something so complex? Well, there are psychometric frameworks that are useful tools which help explain how people differ in the way they use their energy – and how they therefore might respond to change (see box below).

Understanding how people use their energy

Used in common parlance these days are the psychological terms ‘introvert’ and ‘extravert’. Often taken to mean ‘quiet’ and ‘loud’ respectively, these concepts fundamentally are about how people use their energy. So for the extravert, energy is focused externally, is boosted from external sources (usually through talking to other people) and is more readily visible to others. So determining whether the extravert’s energy is up or down is usually easier to recognise than for the introvert. For introverts, energy is focused and used internally, and stimulated by taking the time to reflect back on matters.

Some have difficulty in identifying which camp they belong to. This is for two reasons. One is that they are amongst the minority who may not have strong preferences for extraversion or introversion, and therefore can happily and readily flex their style to different scenarios. The second reason is that while holding clear preferences, many of us have learnt very quickly that we need to do things that require us to use our energy differently. In a teaching-led organisation that I am currently working with, I discovered that experienced teachers sometimes find it difficult to identify themselves as either introvert or extravert, as they need to learn how to be both depending on their time-tabled activity.

So we know that psychological characteristics have an impact on how people use their energy. It also affects the impact that we have on others. It is often misconceived that extraverts have greater impact on others, and are more likely to be the leaders in organisations. In fact, their impact is just different from that of the introvert. Whilst you may be more likely to know what an extravert is thinking and feeling, an introvert is likely to be more considered and definitive in what they say, and have impact through their silences. So what do personality dimensions mean for times of change, and the emotional turmoil that goes along with that?

Let’s explore four particular aspects of managing change where the personalities of a group can play a big part in the link between change and emotional energy:

1. Articulating the vision for change
With every programme of change, there is a point where organisations talk to their staff to tell them about the change they want to undertake. At worst, this will be a matter of fact description. At best this will involve presenting a compelling vision of a bright new future that excites and convinces of the need for change. This has been emphasised by John Kotter , a well-known change management and leadership author, as a key part of change management. This process of engaging people in the vision particularly appeals to those with an instinct for the bigger picture, or seeing things in broader terms. For them the need to see the link between the changes proposed and the higher order goals of the organisation will be vital in understanding and getting excited about change. For others with a more practical, detail-conscious instinct, the proof will be in the evidence of the clear, specific reality of change – what is going to change exactly, and how will that impact my working day? Only when you answer that question will more practical thinkers begin to feel energised and more positive about what is being proposed.

2. The staff briefing
When an organisation has described its vision, the next step is to get buy-in from staff. Often a mechanism for this is the face-to-face staff briefing. But the preferences of staff for how they use their energy will impact on the value they get from this. For the extraverts, their preference is to share their thoughts and responses as they experience them, and meeting as a group to hear about and discuss changes plays to this preference. Managers often find that this group contribute more, of course depending on other factors such as confidence levels and organisational culture. Generally, introverts will use this forum as a point for them to receive information and see how others respond to it. You may hear fewer comments from introverts until after a staff briefing as they generally need time to reflect and consider, to evaluate others responses and develop their thinking. Better still will be a prior opportunity to consider the information. By internalising their energy in this way to reach a view through reflection, the outcome is a more considered response, and what the introvert verbalises is fully formed. Be wary of taking as read the extraverts initial response – while helpful to see initial reactions, these may well change almost overnight as new information or reflections develop. Of course, there are varying degrees of introversion and extraversion, which will magnify or reduce the impact of the aforementioned.

3. Requests for upward feedback and suggestion schemes
Many companies run suggestion schemes, and many report disappointing results. People seem reluctant to use these channels to provide suggestions on improvements to the business. This may reflect the perceptions of how willing the organisation is to listen, or it may reflect the positioning and format of the scheme. But again personality can come into play here – different personal preferences can reflect whether you are energised by the opportunity to develop and put forward ideas. There are some who look for the bigger picture and exploring future possibilities as opposed to being focused on immediate practical realities. Contributing to the shape and direction of the organisation into the future is likely to be an important part of their connection to their workplace. Upward feedback can also be important to getting the implementation of change right, as well as engaging staff. For those who need to understand the ‘why’ of change, they will want to be involved earlier, to explore the rationale and proposals further until they fit to the bigger picture. For those whose thinking is more structured, they will want to be involved later when the vision is clear, but they can influence the planning and fleshing-out of proposals until they can gain comfort from thorough thinking and planning.

4. Accepting and embracing a new direction
At some stage you will hope that communicating and engaging others in change moves into gaining acceptance from your people, or even better, positive feeling and support for change. There is a persuasive piece for managers and leaders here to convince those who are resistant that this is the right thing to do. Again, personal differences come into play. One of the strongest personality differences when it comes to convincing someone is around the logical focus versus relationship focus. For those who take a very logical, rational response to challenges or decision-making, the key will be in the evidence-based argument for change, the facts will need to be presented clearly. For those with more of a relationship focus, they will need to understand the impact on people, and the benefits to relationships internally or externally with customers or stakeholders. Using emotive language is likely to be effective for these individuals.

The results?
In short, managing change and the energy surrounding it, both positive and negative is not a one-size-fits-all challenge, but a process of engaging individuals, which requires an understanding of individual differences. Whilst change will surely trigger emotional responses and changes in energy levels, understanding how to appeal to different thinking styles can help you to harness that group energy for better change results.

HARNESSING POSITIVE TEAM ENERGY

ER Consultants’ application of psychometrics can help better harness team energy during difficult periods of change. Our method will help you:

• To understand your team’s preferences and strengths – understanding the way they like to use their energy enables you to understand and manage their responses to change and uncertainty, and to predict individual’s crunch points;
• To enable your team to understand their own preferences and strengths – to help them in better understanding their own responses to change;
• To develop a common language for discussing differences in how team members use their energy – openness will help you to embrace those differences rather than suffer personality clashes in difficult times.

For more information, contact: louise.earle@erconsultants.co.uk
© er consultants Topics Issue 1, 2008