Readiness: Why Rushing Change Deepens Resistance

The politics of human development. Best suited for: leadership development, organizational change, strategic alignment, psychological safety.

For those of us who work in human development, it feels like an extraordinary privilege. We witness people's hopes and struggles, help them navigate their careers, and create space for meaningful conversations. The work challenges us, but it also inspires us. Even with setbacks, it always feels worth the effort.

But over the years, I have heard the same comment repeatedly, from clients, from leaders in development programs, and from professionals in team-building sessions and innovation workshops.

"Our voices don't matter."

People appreciate the time spent learning, the tools, and the conversations. But beneath the surface, a deeper fear lingers, that despite all the work, the system will remain the same.

I used to resist this. I wanted to believe that good ideas and hard work always found a way. I didn't realize how much politics shapes what happens inside organizations. Efficiency and leadership don't always align; human development often gets caught in that contradiction. Agencies chase clients. HR teams launch programs to prove they invest in people.

Executives approve initiatives to check a box. Participants show up, eager to engage. Coaches, facilitators, and trainers put their best energy into guiding transformation.

And then—nothing happens.

Not because people lack talent, commitment, or skill. The problem runs deeper. Leaders ask people to develop skills that don't match how their organizations work. They push for engagement while maintaining systems that keep employees powerless. They encourage innovation while punishing risk.

The real question isn't why leadership development fails to create change. It's why we keep pretending it will, without changing the conditions that make change possible.

The best leadership development programs start long before the first session. They begin with an honest conversation. Every stakeholder, executives, HR leaders, and participants, needs to say clearly and without pretense what they expect. This step is not an exercise; it lays the foundation for what comes next.

• What the program can and cannot deliver.

• What leaders can realistically embody, and what they won't.

• What the organization is now, not what it hopes to become.

Without this clarity, leadership programs become a performance, well-intentioned but empty. People leave with hope, only to be trapped in the same contradictions. I know this because I've seen what happens when people wait for the right moment.

One of the most rewarding experiences in my career came when, after five years, a client called and said, "Stephen, I think we are ready.”

Before that moment, I had met this HR professional three times. Each time, we talked about readiness and asked whether the hopes, dreams, and goals for the program could actually take shape, and each time, this professional made the hard but honest call: "Not yet."

Then, something shifted.

Leadership at the headquarters level changed, the local culture evolved, and the company created the conditions for transformation. Only then did the program move forward. That moment taught me something critical. Rushing change doesn't create progress. It deepens resistance.

When you open a door and show people hope, they expect something real to follow. If nothing happens, you don't just fail to create change—you make future change harder.

You can reach Stephen at stephen@alygn.company