350 Say What They Can't Unhear: The 9 Principles of Lasting Change with Tamsen Webster | Partnering Leadership Global Thought Leader

***DISCLAIMER: Please note that the following AI-generated transcript may not be 100% accurate and could contain misspellings or errors.***


[00:00:00] Mahan Tavakoli: . Tamsen Webster, welcome back to Partnering Leadership. I am thrilled to have you in this conversation with me. 

[00:00:05] Tamsen Webster: I am 

[00:00:05] Mahan Tavakoli: so glad to be back.

Thank you so much for having me. Tamsin. I absolutely love your work and really enjoyed the conversation we had on find your red thread episode two 32. I highly recommend for everyone to listen to that  but now you've written the new book, say what they can't on here.

The nine principles of lasting change. Would love to know what got you to write a new book? 

[00:00:34] Tamsen Webster: So a couple of things. The first book I wrote was very much meant to be a how to book. It was for the folks who were really trying to make the case for their own ideas. It was for the creators. It was for people who, to some extent, were already familiar with the nature of my work,

and the response to that book has been so positive that I realized there was, an opportunity to get some of the underlying concepts out there in a way that could have a broader impact. And I was particularly hearing about and seeing, and this was true from my own experience in, the, corporate world and professional world is that leaders, organizations, institutions, startups day in day out, they are trying to get buy in for changes, both big and small and the faster they can get that buy in or the faster they can discover they're not going to get it, the better and what I also saw was that there wasn't a lot of information out there that was helping to drive that in a way that didn't Then require more work later.

In other words, a lot of the information that's out there generally falls into persuasion or influence. Sometimes you can find some information in sales and marketing stuff and messaging. But a huge amount of that was really geared towards short term action meaning getting someone to say yes in the moment to close the deal, to get the sale.

And when that happens, We don't always necessarily get true buy in, true investment in what this is all about. But that's something I'm deeply interested in. I've been interested in transformational change since I was 17, and that's legitimate. And since communications and change communications has been my area for this long, I've spent a long time thinking about it.

This book was really about saying, you know what, I don't see these, I don't see these principles out there. I don't see this approach to persuasion and influence out there. I don't see alternatives to, getting people on board with a change.

That doesn't feel manipulative or coercive or authoritarian in some way. And so humbly it was like, let me put this out into the market and see how people respond. 

[00:02:47] Mahan Tavakoli: And I see the focus that you have on lasting change, which is important. As you mentioned, Tamsen, leaders. Want to lead their teams through lasting change and impact. Now you also connect to people's deep seated beliefs and identities and the importance to connect and engage with that. So there is a lot of human psychology in this. 

[00:03:12] Tamsen Webster: Yes. Oh, wow. That's a rich topic. Okay. So the first thing is, yes, there's even schools of leadership, transformational leadership, that's all about transformational change and being able to empower your people to create these transformations. And yet even in transformational leadership, it feels like there's a dearth of information, skill building, concepts that actually tell leaders how to do that.

And I should say there's a dearth in business and leadership scholarship and writing about that. But as you point out, These are questions that other fields have been addressing researching writing and theorizing about for quite a long time. Psychology is obviously a big one. Psychology, psychiatry, cognitive neuroscience.

And then something I've become very interested in lately is the adult education field. Also knows a huge amount about this. There's a whole field of transformative learning, which is what has to happen for someone to change, really, from a belief standpoint, what kind of information process has to happen.

So this book really became an opportunity to say, let's put these concepts that are well known, researched, evidence based elsewhere. And let's put them in the context of. Professional leadership and what leaders need to know and how they apply, how these same concepts apply in that situation,

in the immortal words of the great philosophers Depeche Mode, people are people, whether like humans or at work, right? Like they're still people, which means all the rules of learning, all the rules of psychology still apply. 

[00:04:56] Mahan Tavakoli: So Tamsin, , I loved your content for many years. Now that you mentioned my all time favorite band, I love you even more.

We will put that aside. But in leaders being able to convey their messages and impact those beliefs that you mentioned, you talk about ding moments. What is the ding moment and what role does that play? 

[00:05:23] Tamsen Webster: So a ding moment is that moment where you hear something you can't unhear.

, if you stop and think about it, there's probably a lot of times like in our past where we've heard something along those lines that as soon as you hear it, you can't unhear it, for example, I don't mention this one in the book, but one of the ones that really.

Stayed in my head as I was finding my way through my panic disorder was actually, of all things, a quote said in Spanish. And like Baz Luhrmann, the Australian that, did like Moulin Rouge and all of that. And one of his very first movies, this movie. Cuckoo Bananas movie called Strictly Ballroom.

A lovely little film, by the way. But there's this moment where the main female protagonist kind of like fires off in Spanish at the main male character, that a life lived in fear is a life half lived. And when she said that, , , it just went ding, right?

Like a gong hit because here I was enmeshed in panic. And, by hearing that phrase that a life lived in fear is a life half lived. Every fiber of my being was like, I do not want to live half a life. This is not acceptable to me to live this way. And so a ding moment can be, something as foundational and personal as that to just the ways, I wrote about this in my blog a while back, I had a dental hygienist one time just say floss first.

And I was like, Dang, that makes a ton of sense. Because after you floss, there's no way that you're gonna not brush your teeth. But if you brush your teeth, first, there's a part of you that goes, I don't need to floss. So she was just like, floss first. So it's those moments where something makes so much sense.

intuitive sense to you that it just sticks. And sometimes that's going to create an immediate action, right? I immediately started to floss first. Sometimes it sits with you and serves as this ongoing drive, this ongoing motivation to figure it out. Because right now, at least with the age that I am, like, my panic disorder was 17 17 17.

I had the first one at 17, I had it for 17 years, and now it's been 17 years since the last one. And I don't remember when Strictly Ballroom came out, but it was probably maybe four, five, six years into the 17. But it was one of those things that once I heard it, I literally couldn't unhear it.

And then sometimes they can be ones that you come up with yourself. So for instance, like the one that I came up with for myself again, that really helped me with my panic disorder was I thought my way in so I can think my way out, because, with therapy and psychology and all sorts of other stuff, cognitive behavioral therapy, I realized that for anxiety, and this isn't true for , all issues, but for anxiety.

and panic a lot of times it very much is a disorder of thought it is a disorder thought pattern that happens in response to something and so once i had that right again that was a piece that i couldn't unhear it's a thought pattern it's how i'm thinking that is either making the panic worse or creating this aspect I experienced that as true.

 I absolutely can see how it's my thinking about what's happening in the moment is what is making my anxiety and my panic get even worse. So when I heard that, I was like, wow I believe that's true. So if that's true, then this other thing must be true that if I thought my way and I can think my way out.

And so again, it was like let me go look for things that will help me think my way out. And I was very much like on a mission , to find things like little thoughts that I could put into my head that would serve as little blocks. Anytime the panic started. To me, , if we're trying to inspire change in other people, our goal is to every extent that we can, we may not always be able to, but to create those moments where we say something that in the context of what somebody wants, and in the context of who they see themselves to be in the context of who they want to be seen as, It becomes something they can't unhear because it makes so much intuitive sense that it puts something else that they've been doing or thinking before that into a whole new light.

It's literally, from a transformative learning standpoint, that's the very definition of a transformation. It changes your frame of reference permanently. And that if we're trying to get someone to stick with something long term, that's what we have to do. I say in the first book, if you want to change what people do, you have to change what they see.

, and the years since what that's very clear, what we need to see and what they need to see differently is. how they're looking at the world, the frame of reference has to change. So that's what a ding moment can do for you. 

[00:10:27] Mahan Tavakoli: So in doing that Tamsin, you gave great examples of ding moments where whether you noticed or individuals can notice things that then stick and stay with them.

What I wonder is for the leader of communicating, whether it is to a team or in many instances, to a group. Organization. There are lots of different people in front of them. How can they create ding moments? Yes. 

[00:10:57] Tamsen Webster: Yeah. So the key to ding moments is if there's one word that I would suggest that leaders remember it's already so ding moments are the production of.

Saying something together, and I'll go into more detail on this that's related to something that somebody already wants is already doing and or already believes, or is already in line with how they see the world. So , for instance, I have a client, a startup client, and they're very much trying to change the world.

They're trying to decarbonize the planet, and they work with a lot of difficult to decarbonize industries car making, car manufacturers, things like that. Things where you just can't take carbon out of it. It's just right now, at least, that's part of it. So some of these car manufacturers, they'll have net zero carbon emissions goals, Makes it very difficult for them to figure out how do they do that when they have, just built into their products and their process are things with carbon in them and things and processes that emit carbon.

And yet they have these zero goals. And so to some extent they're like let's buy offsets and whatever, but a lot of that's blown back. But then I have this, startup company where they have created and they have developed the technology for creating. What's known as a carbon negative materials, meaning these materials actually remove carbon permanently and when combined in a product or in a building with carbon emitting materials.

Neutralizes the emissions. Now, I don't need to know the technique and the technology about that, but if I'm having a conversation with a leader or a purchasing person, I'm saying, okay, you already want to get to net zero, you've set these goals. You already have things that have carbon in them and are not going to have it.

But here's something that you already know to be true. And that is, to get to zero, every positive needs a negative. So that's why Our company, if I'm speaking on behalf of the startup, has developed carbon negative materials so that you, by substituting some of these materials into your products right now, can actually get to zero in a way that's legitimate, long lasting, sustainable, and that works.

And at that point, Because in this context, it's something again, so clear and something that people already know to be true. It becomes very difficult for people to unhear that, right? They're not listing features. They're not feature flooding or benefit bombing. They are giving something that somebody knows to be true.

Oh, that's true. If I'm trying to get to zero. Whether I'm talking about carbon emissions or pizza, right? If I've got two positive and I'm trying to get to zero, two of them have to go away somehow, so negative has to happen. And that's really the secret to this kind of thing, is articulating clear, understandable way, something that people already believe to be true.

And it's about creating that context, right? That is new for that preexisting belief that really gives it this additional resonance in the moment. Because, I can just say to you in some other context, Hey, to get to zero, every negative needs a positive. And you're like, yeah. And, but in the context of trying to get to carbon neutral, in the context of trying to get to carbon neutral, in a difficult to decarbonize industry.

Then that phrase now carries extraordinary power. And that's what the key is really to creating this transformational change. It's just like bringing in these beliefs that people already know to be true that help them see the world and see something unfamiliar through very familiar and therefore very comfortable lenses.

[00:15:07] Mahan Tavakoli: So in communicating that change, I want to make sure I understand it right. For example, a client is a president of an educational institution. They first build on the beliefs. That exists within that institution about education, about the value to the students and or the other stakeholders in building the ding moment for the bridge for that change.

So the word already connecting to their present beliefs enables people to engage with and connect with that change better. Yes, absolutely. Because

[00:15:51] Tamsen Webster: it's not another new thing, , so there's a whole chapter on this in the book, generally, if we're trying to get a change to happen, and we're experiencing resistance, then, a lot of the advice out there.

And again, at one level, it makes sense. It's we've got to challenge those beliefs, we've got to challenge those limiting beliefs, , we've got to convince them that this other thing is new which Fundamentally means that we're trying to get them to want something that they don't currently want.

Or we're trying to get them to believe something they don't currently believe, or worst case scenario, both. Again, at one level that makes sense. Because , one of the biggest barriers to change is what psychologists call, cognitive inertia. It's the same concept as in physics that a body at rest tends to stay at rest and what cognitive immersion inertia means is that we like to hold on to the thoughts that we already have, the stories we already tell ourselves and the beliefs we already have.

So again, it seems to make sense that if we're trying to get something moving, shouldn't we like shove those things out of the way? But as I explained in the book, Yeah, the problem is that actually doesn't work in two different ways, also thanks to neuroscience. The first is, because of cognitive inertia, we are very unlikely to even listen to something that we don't immediately believe or don't immediately want.

There's just way too much other stuff going on. And we believe ourselves first, right?, I think I quoted in my first book Blaise Pascal who said that the concepts that have come into our own minds more than those that have given rise from other people.

That's a terrible paraphrase, but it's close to that. So that's the first thing is that we're unlikely to hear it in the first place. If we don't immediately believe it, if it doesn't immediately ring true for us, if it's not immediately recognizable as something we want, not going to listen. The second thing is that even if we do, Even if we're like, okay, I'll try , when push comes to shove, we've got this new weak, little baby belief in a pushing and shoving battle with an 800 pound gorilla of a belief that you've had for a very long time, a belief that has all the weight of history and experience and confirmation bias behind it.

And so this is why, , one of the big. Thoughts and big hypotheses of the book. Is that instead of trying to , get somebody to believe a new belief, what we want to do is to move an old belief into a new context, so that we're able to find something that's even stronger than what's standing in the way of what's going.

 There are these different layers of belief, and that hasn't been well defined.

[00:18:37] Tamsen Webster: And where are those moments of, what's above a primal belief about whether or not we believe the world is good or bad, somewhere between that, which is as low as they go, according to the research out of University of Pennsylvania, and let's say political beliefs. Is a whole range of other beliefs including for instance the golden rule, which is not a primal belief, but just about every culture has some version of it, 

 So that's the kind of thing. And, to get to zero, every positive needs a negative that when we get to that level of belief, and I call them, I don't call them this in the book, but I refer to them in this, in my practice is bedrock beliefs. When we get to those bedrock beliefs those real core beliefs to what we have then we not only are able to find those even stronger beliefs, But they tend to be more shared as well.

Meaning we're able to find common ground in what otherwise might seem like a totally irreparable, irreconcilable situation. And when we're talking about leaders and organizations, this is absolutely where the values, the mission, can come into play, and I use an example in the book, I said where a leader is leaning on a definition of innovation that the company itself came up with as part of their reasoning for a particular change.

That is why identifying some of these core principles, core beliefs is so important and. Quick point on this. This is not what you wish your beliefs are, right? That's what Ardress and Schoen call like your espoused values and beliefs. What we're really looking for here are what are the beliefs that are in use?

What are the beliefs and the principles that are actually guiding what you're doing, because , that's really the power of all of this. 

[00:20:30] Mahan Tavakoli: As I was thinking about this, Tamsin, a couple of things. One is that it gets the leader to reflect on the beliefs, Within the organization, as you mentioned, the practice beliefs, the practice values, not the espoused ones.

And rather than what I've heard many leaders try to do, an attempt at changing those beliefs, you are building on those beliefs to communicate that change. Exactly. That is an important part of thinking through how we want to communicate. So we say things , that people can't unhear and want to believe in and want to support for the longterm rather than nodding.

And then as you mentioned, that becomes the little gorilla, the 800 pound gorilla ends up overcoming it as soon as they face some resistance. That's 

[00:21:23] Tamsen Webster: right. So let's just find another gorilla like that's what you're doing is saying where do I find an even bigger gorilla of a belief or at least one that is just as strong so that, it's got a fighting chance and This is where, when I'm working with my clients on this, and I'm working with leaders and a lot of times the coaches of these leaders.

This is the skill that needs some building, because we just don't think about this a lot. We don't actually articulate our frames of reference very often. And when we do, we tend to articulate as we were talking about before what we wish they were. But. It's interesting that, the questioning process that I go through with clients is first and foremost starts with identifying what is the primary question that we're trying to answer?

What is it that we're trying to do here? What is that goal? And you'll notice, and this is a shift from conventional thinking as well, it isn't problem focused because if we think about it, any goal that is unachieved, really important goal unachieved, any need unmet. Is in itself a problem because it creates a gap between what we have and what we don't have.

And so by identifying something like that, how do we keep pace with the competition? How do we attract and retain more employees? How do we, meet our KPIs this quarter? There are problems embedded in that. But it's about figuring out, how do we achieve that? And then if you back people up and then say, Okay, other than table stakes, other than the stuff that you know, have to be there.

What do you believe? Or what does this organization believe to its core is necessary for delivering the an answer to that question for delivering on that goal, delivering on that thing. Then they'll tell you, , they'll usually misfire a couple times, but then eventually they'll get something and they're like, yes, okay, that's it.

And then you say why that? And that's how you get to a principle in use, because that's when they'll go because X, right? And again, the first times they'll come back and they'll come back to say because it provides this benefit. I'm like Nope.

A benefit is just another articulation of that goal. Yeah. And they're like then we need this feature. I'm like, Nope. That is just another aspect of the answer. Why this thing? Why this approach? So if somebody says, Oh we need to make sure there's accountability, just to use an example from one of my clients.

We need accountability. Okay. I agree. If you're trying to create a strategic shift, we need accountability in our leaders. Okay. Because accountability is important. Fine. Why? Because it keeps people on track. Fine. Why? And eventually what we got , was in this case, it made sense to define accountability from this company's, this person's perspective.

He runs a coaching practice based on this and the way he identified it was accountability, it's important because accountability is the ownership of outcomes. That's it. That's the principle I use and you can verify it because you can look in everything that company writes and does and you can see that principle lived.

It may never have been articulated that way until that point. But now when someone says, Okay, fine, I'm talking to a lot of different leadership development practices, like what's so great about yours? You can say we focus on accountability because this. And that's not just all right, because if you only have one person accountable, that's not gonna get there.

So the other thing we need is and in this case of leadership contract scale. Okay. Why? Success requires execution at scale. So because success requires execution at scale and accountability is the ownership of outcomes. That's why our leadership development Practice is all about helping your leaders scale accountability through the organization.

Oh, and again, now you get at a point where someone is either going to agree or disagree in principle with you right there and it's 30 seconds or less. It's not even an elevator speech. . It's a lobby pitch. It's not even a pitch. Get all fired up about this. Because it's actually your philosophy.

It's your argument for why you do what you do the way that you do it. And this is so important to me because when we're talking about long term change, long term relationships with our employees, with our staff, with our clients, with our customers, that is based Not on short term transactional benefit, but on deep seated alignment.

Of belief and approach. And so my whole perspective on this is the faster you can get that perspective up on the table, the faster, and they know if there's any hope in moving forward, and so that to me is so critical because it allows us to go again, not only get that internal clarity, but everything that internal clarity can help us deliver, which is Oh, this is who we're for.

This is why we do what we do. This is what we care about. And it's people who also care about these things that are going to be the ones that are most happy working here, that are going to be most successful and happy with our approach that are going to be most happy with our products or services, whatever they might be. 

,  And I think Tamsen, If leaders take the time to do some of the deep dive thinking that you're talking about, that enables them on an ongoing basis to be able to connect to those beliefs and communicate effectively. So this is not something that needs to be done every time. You do the deep dive. dive and connect with those beliefs.

[00:27:13] Mahan Tavakoli: Therefore you are able to communicate whether it is in engaging your people in communicating change. It's worthwhile spending some time on it. Now, there is something else that you mentioned you talk about change as a reaction rather than an action. 

[00:27:32] Tamsen Webster: Given that this book was written for leaders trying to create the conditions of transformational change for their people, , , you cannot make somebody else change. You can make somebody else act, but you can't make somebody else change.

All you can hope to do is contribute to , the conditions that are more likely to create that ding moment. That's all. All you can do and it was interesting because I had a little baby battle with my editors when we were first going through, the various principles and what order I had chosen for them, and they thought I should start with the second principle, which is that every decision has a story and I said, That is a key one, and in fact, , it's one of the key principles behind my first book. But the reason why I started with change isn't just an action, it's a reaction.

It's because when you're trying to inspire lasting change in somebody else, the very first thing that they're reacting to is you. And how you present that change in the first place. And to me, this is where so many change efforts fail before they really ever get started because they fail at the first reaction because.

, people don't understand what the change is or why it's happening or it doesn't resonate for them, or it seems like it's gonna be scary and painful for them, or , it feels like it's coming down as a fiat,, as a command. This is how it's gonna have to be.

And even if it's a change that has to be made, there are ways to do it in a way , that aren't. necessarily going to create that initial, , as I describe in the book, reactants, this resistance, that's going to come from it in the first place. So it was really important for me, given the fact that this was a book for me to help people help other people create change, to understand how very important even that initial articulation of change.

 One of my favorite examples this was a little story that didn't make it into the book. I remember one time as well. I love baseball and , there was a perfect game going into the ninth inning. So if people aren't, familiar with baseball, a perfect game is where.

, no batters, no players reach base, meaning every pitch that the pitcher throws to a batter, either that person struck out, someone caught it, whatever. It also means that the pitcher didn't make any mistakes, meaning, in baseball, if you throw four bad pitches, if they don't go where they're supposed to the person at the plate can just walk to first base.

So a perfect game means none of that has happened. That every pitch has been caught, missed, and hit its target. And then oftentimes this will happen like it's very tense and very exciting. And then in the ninth inning, when it's really stressful because you're like, is it going to make it something will happen?

It'll break up the, somebody, something like somebody will mess up, somebody hits a home run. Pitcher makes a mistake, whatever, and then the perfect game is over. And I remember one time I heard these two announcers have this exchange. And one was like, ah, more perfect games get broken up in the ninth inning than anywhere else.

And the other person said, actually, more perfect games get broken up in the first inning. Than anywhere else. And I was like that is what's true of change as well. It's not way down the pike where we'd like to think it happened is that one of our best opportunities to make change happen is in its initial presentation to someone in the first place.

So that's why that, , first principle is first and why it's so important. 

[00:31:09] Mahan Tavakoli: You also mentioned the second principle. Every decision has a story. How does that fit in? 

[00:31:17] Tamsen Webster: That's the key.

 My first job out of grad school was as a change management consultant. And what was interesting is that my big project then was to create their communication methodology. And what's interesting is that I would say still to this date, and I am happy to be proved wrong.

So if there's somebody who was like, no, There's great writing and great research and scholarship and change communication. I would love to see it because even now when I talk to change management practitioners, so much of it is on the strategy, on the implementation, on the tools, on the whatever.

And I'm like, y'all if it's not communicated well in the first place, it. You're running up, you're pushing a boulder uphill, like you may still be successful, but my goodness, it could be a lot easier if we just paid attention to how we framed it in the first place. Every decision has a story, I is so critical here because, Once you understand that they're reacting to something, then we need to understand what is it that happens in someone's brain in order to make that decision to change?

And, as I frame it in the book, every decision has a story, meaning every action that we take is Ends an internal argument in our head about why that particular action makes sense. We tell ourselves a story almost always unconsciously about if I do this, I'll get that. This happened because this happened.

That's a story. It's a cause and effect relationship. There's a, I'm experiencing conflict, but because I do this is what's going to solve it. And so this, and so it's not necessarily a once upon a time story, but it is a. It is a potentially true or not connection between a cause and effect.

And so If we miss even that idea, then, or if, or let's frame it from this way, if we take that into account, that in order for us to act, we have to have made a connection between cause and effect that's strong enough for us to make the action that will create the effect, we can identify right there where a lot of change communication.

And I included in this marketing and sales messaging, by the way, goes wrong because typically what we are doing is focusing on one or the other, or only those two. And here's what I mean. We are focusing on what we need to solve this problem. So we're going to go do this. And they spend all their time amping up the problem and really trying to raise the stakes on the problem.

Or, as some approaches say, make the pain of the status quo exceed the pain of change. Okay, so there's a Okay, if I the effect is identified, if I solve this, then that pain goes away. I'd say marketing. So that's I'd say sales is biggest issue is it focuses very much on just the effect part of this marketing's big issue is they so focused.

Very much just on the kind of, on the thing that we want you to do, right? So if the, if the question is how do we solve this problem, then marketing, I think over indexes on, we have a solution. This is it. That's all you need. And a lot of times we're presenting this, like we do X and you're like, and I should care why?

And so that, but if we have to have cause and effect we have to have ends and means. To before we'll act then all of a sudden we know that we have to have both of those pieces in any message of change possible, but that's not all because a story isn't just it's beginning and it's end.

It's the justification for why that effect, why that answer answers that question, why that effect is, that cause and effect relationship. And one of the things that I often say to people that they go, yeah, that's true. If you've ever had someone say to you, the ends justify the means.

And you're like, Not those means it's because you may have agreed on the outcome, right? You may have agreed that the desired effect is right, but you don't agree on how you get there. There's not alignment, as we were talking about before, on the deeper principles about what is the right way, what's the connection between the question and the answer.

And so the reason why that second one is so important, right? And it's important whether we're trying to think about change within ourselves or change within anybody else, is that when we're articulating that case, we need all the pieces. We need the cause and the effect And the relationship between the two because otherwise we're basically just telling the beginning and the end of the story and we're leaving out that middle part, right?

We're basically saying, to use Star Wars as an example, there was once a bratty kid named Luke who saved the galaxy. And it's just like something happened there, but like, why, what happened and we need that. And so that's, yeah that's why that second one is so important is because change will not happen without it unless that story makes sense to people.

And so that means that if we're in the role of. If you're a leader who is trying to inspire that change and create those conditions for change in somebody else, we have to give them all the information that will make that story make sense to them, which means sometimes changing the perspective that we're using on what makes sense because what just because something makes sense to us.

and how it makes sense to us does not mean it's going to automatically make sense in that format to the other person as well. 

[00:36:51] Mahan Tavakoli:  Those stories are really important and the connection to the beliefs you were talking about before Tamsin. Yeah. But how about when there are conflicting beliefs or truths, which don't only happen in the political environment, in most organizations, people are not of one mind.

How can That be at rest. 

[00:37:14] Tamsen Webster: We've got problems if we are anchoring on beliefs that are either too high or too low. And it isn't just surface, but identity based beliefs that are like identity groups, if we're only talking in the level of just use politics, , or if we're talking about organizations, if you're using identity beliefs that are associated with sales versus marketing or leadership versus team, these are. Like, those are going to be some beliefs and assumptions that are operating, I would say, up here.

That's problematic because those oftentimes don't seem, they seem irreconcilable, like these it's farmers and cowmen, chalk and cheese, marketing and sales, fundraising and marketing, it's like there's every company is experiencing these apparently irreconcilable splits. And so it has always been at the very core.

And this is one of the things that I spend quite a bit of time and in the third chapter on where I talk about how principles set patterns is that there's recent research from 2019, which has been replicated and added to on whether what are known as primal world beliefs. And this is work out of University of Pennsylvania, Dr.

Jared Clifton's team. And what they found is that people have. these, they're not even core, they're primal and they aren't even sure where they come from because they're so deep seated. They seem to be present regardless of someone's upbringing or socioeconomic status. It's just, it does seem, and again, I need to figure out more about this, that we just show up in the world with predispositions towards seeing the world as, let's say, beautiful or ugly or as a safe or dangerous.

So if we are trying to argue for a change at that level, we're in trouble too, right? Because if you're trying to say, and I see a lot of people doing this, Everything's interconnected. Okay, that's a primal belief. Primal interconnected versus, I forget what the balance is, but separate.

That's a primal belief. And you might say, but there's all this evidence. I'm like, It's a primal belief. So if someone truly doesn't believe at a primal level that everything's interconnected and you're making a case for an action, a behavior, a change, or whatever, on that, not going to work either. So this is where, again, I think that there is this opportunity somewhere in the middle.

And so when you're finding with a team, with a person or whatever, where there seems to be this Irreconcilability. The first thing I would say is check to make sure you're not arguing at one of those two levels. If you're at a primal level, you need to come up. And if you're an identity level, you need to come down.

And we need to try to find something at that golden rule that, what goes up must come down, that body in motion stays in motion kind of level to that both of you share and to see can we find common ground on that kind of principle and then let's work back up. Sometimes you're not right.

So that's the first thing is sometimes you just need to drill for a different bedrock belief and sometimes you're going to find better places there. And then sometimes you're just not. And That's at the point where you and they have a choice, right? So if you are speaking with a client or a customer, for instance, and they fundamentally don't believe, let's say they don't believe that every decision has a story.

If somebody fundamentally doesn't believe that the stories we agree with, the actions we agree with are based on beliefs we already have. This is not the book for them, right? My approach is not going to be right for them. And I am okay with that. Because I believe this to my core. I can give you all the evidence and whatever, but if you don't believe it, then we're just never going to see eye to eye on that.

And we can either agree to disagree, And keep finding some other way to work together, or there are going to be times when it's just we're not meant to work together. This is not what's going to make sense for everybody long term. So in the case of figuring out how to make it work, I actually look towards the founding fathers of the United States.

That is a great example of people who I think at a primal did not see eye to eye. And at a political level, Really didn't agree, it's the continued split between, federalism and states rights, but they did believe on something core, they believed in an idea , of an America.

They believed in being separate from England. That they were willing to say, and they believed that there was enough of it. other stuff that they agreed on, that there was enough common ground to be able to move forward. And to me, that is the ideal. When you're, when you get to a point of kind of agreeing to disagree is that we just need to find those places where when it's possible to dig deeper.

Not too deep, but dig deeper to find those things that we both share and care about. We can operate from there. And when we don't, I think it allows by articulating these beliefs, maybe it's starry eyed idealism, but I believe it allows us to, when we're in a position of saying, you know what, I just don't think we're going to see eye to eye here.

It allows us to feel like I've been heard, you've been heard, and we just don't see it the same way. And I think that allows a separation to happen with respect. Of an alternative worldview that is based, allows you to set people free who are just not going, again, if this is your core belief as an individual, as a leader, as an organization, and somebody you work for just doesn't share it, is it the best thing for you, the organization, and them to be there?

That's, there's probably as many answers to that as whatever, but in my point of view, I think, we get the best. Success from people. When there is alignment of those internal stories, right? And it's actually, an idea that I've been kicking around as part of my doctoral program as well.

This kind of whole idea of, for lack of a better term right now, I'm calling it narrative centered leadership, where we're, where there is a story of the organization that is still being built. And a lot of leadership principles and leadership theories focus on the leaders, right? Or the followers or the leaders in the followers.

And yet a huge number of companies exist. Before the leader and the follower ever arrive. And if everybody does their job, will exist long after. So there is this third thing. And the leader I see is their job is to really steward the narrative. And they get to shape what it is at the moment. But there is history that comes before them.

And there is a legacy that they'll leave after. And they can draw on that. They can go back and look and say why did we do things this way? And how do we, and are there times when we need to change that? Because society has changed, perspectives have changed. We've got different voices now to put into the mix.

And I think there's an opportunity if we put the narrative at the center to say that there are to give people more opportunities, like our team members to connect, but also to find those moments of what are the most core things? Because if somebody doesn't align at the most core of the narrative, then is it really serving the narrative of the organization and what it's there to do to have people who.

Are ambivalent and different or even antagonistic to some of those core principles. I don't think so. But I think it, I think thinking in terms of putting the narrative of the center raises. I think more respectful conversations about what is it all about. And it also puts everybody on a much more even footing, 

where isn't just leader and follower. It's like the most important thing here is actually the organization and what the organization is trying to do. And that organization doesn't exist without the people in it and the people it serves. So there has to be this Negotiation, but I don't think we can have that negotiation if we're not clear on these elements that are contributing to it.

 As I was reflecting on this, one of the challenges I see, and I love to get your thoughts on is whether People who typically are CEOs of organizations or lead organizations, whether there are different sets of primal beliefs, because one of the things that I have seen many make the mistake on, and I reflected on as I was reading your book, is that the disconnect is with some of the primal beliefs, which you specifically say, don't go there, which is why I wonder, is it that Those individuals are gauging everyone with their own set of primal beliefs, which tend to be different.

[00:46:13] Tamsen Webster: Yes. So I'm not saying that Oh, someone's got a different primal belief than you let them go. That's not at all what I'm saying, because what I'm saying is. 

One is that beware arguing for the change based on that primal belief. Because you are, let's say roughly going to have a 50 50 split like there's very likely you're going to have half the people who that is going to be a very resonant argument for it and half the people for whom it isn't.

It's just not going to be, what logicians experts in logic call a sound argument to somebody because that premise it is not true for them. They don't believe the world is a interconnected place or something like that. So what I'm saying is, it's really, I think it's critically important that leaders know what the primals are and they know what theirs are and thankfully Clifton's team, like they go, if you go to my primals.

com, you can take a test and you can find out what your primals are because it's, I think it's really good to go, oops, I'm arguing for it on something that Unless I'm sure that person shares that Primal with me, I need to find a different I need to find a different basis for arguing this.

And so an example I like to give is that. For instance Pew Research has found that both conservatives and liberals alike value and prioritize the family very highly. The role of the family is not a primal belief. It's a core belief but it's not a primal one. And so it would be really interesting, for instance, to figure out what are the different primal arguments for prioritizing family?

Do you prioritize the family because you see the world as a beautiful place and it's most encaptured encapsulated in your family and that's the best way to take advantage of it, advantage of it, or to make use of it, or, Show it experiencing it. Or, if you see the world is a dangerous place, are you prioritizing family because you want to protect them from what's happening in the world?

I don't think it really matters if you could, for instance, make an argument for your change on the importance of family. You don't have to go to that primal level. But you do need to know what that primal level is, at least for you, so that you avoid the pitfall of arguing from that point. So that's where I come at it.

I just say it's very good to know, that if I think X, Y, and Z, I got to be super careful about making sure I'm not defaulting to that as my explanation for why something is true. A phrase that when I first wrote it in the book I just wrote it and then afterwards I was like no, Tamsin, this is actually really important to you. That we're making change happen by reinforcing people's identity and not by asking them to change themselves. We're asking people to change what they do without changing who they are. And that's really important.

[00:48:58] Mahan Tavakoli: In your final chapter, Thompson, you mentioned believers remorse,  

[00:49:04] Tamsen Webster: yeah. So my position is that there is no such thing as believers remorse, like that a true believer never regrets the decision itself. Not if they think that the decision is right, truly right, from an emotional standpoint, ethical standpoint, value standpoint, outcome standpoint, we may regret.

The consequence of a decision, even if, we may regret that it didn't turn out how we hoped, it may still be a difficult decision, but what I have seen and what I have experienced, and we can probably think in our own lives, that there are times when you can still look back at it and go, yeah, but I still think it was the right decision.

. I can regret X, Y, and Z about it, but I don't regret the decision itself. That's why I end the book with it. I said, there, I don't believe, and I see no evidence that there is such a thing as believers remorse. Because, and so the lesson for leaders is.

[00:49:58] Tamsen Webster: That are our job all the way back to the first principle is to avoid introducing anything into this process of change that violates that sense of rightness. And so that's why it's so important in my mind to get to that. That definition of what, why does a change feel right to you as a leader?

So you're right to your point earlier about this starts first and foremost, if you're trying to inspire change in somebody else, unidentifying why you believe in it, truly, why do you believe in it? What are the principles that you are using internally? What's the story that you're telling yourself about why this is right?

Because. What that does for you is that allows you to say, allows you to, we always talk about authenticity and the authentic leader and, this is how you get there. You basically say, this is why I am doing this. This is why I believe. And if you cannot come up with that, with a change that you are being asked to make, I don't know, can you be authentic about it?

I don't know how I could. The, what this allows you to do is to make the case based on what you believe. And what I think that this does, and this is something that I'm, that I am both very curious and passionate about, is that what I also believe that does is that it puts the risk of change where it belongs, on the person asking for it.

Right now, almost every approach to change puts the risk of the change on the other party. We are asking that person to do something different, that person to believe something different, that person to want something different. But as they say in the book, really, if you think about it, this, one way to look at this is that it's not even persuasion at all, because it's about presenting your case for this change.

It's about saying, because I believe in this principle, and I believe in this other principle, that's why I believe this action, which combines those principles, Is the way for us to achieve this thing that we all agree is important. And if I believe that I believe it's right, then all the risk is on me because it's I am adopting the risk that you may not agree and that I may have to find a different way to present that I may have to deal with the risk of not everyone's going to come along, come on board.

But if the change is right, then, and you have committed to be an authentic leader, and you're committed to your own narrative, and the narrative of the organization and or if you're a servant leader, then it seems to me that is a risk, that is effort that you would be willing to make.

And in a lot of ways, that's the bet. That's the risk I'm taking by putting all of this out there in the book. I want to live, walk the talk and say, this is what I believe. And put that out there and say, it's opening it up. It's opening up for people to say, Oh no, I don't agree.

I think there's some other way to do it or that this is the right way. This is all we need. I'm like, okay, fine. I believe it. And I think that there's enough other people who would agree with how I see it, that. It can be the path to changing how we ask for change. 

 one of the key points that I learned from you is the need for aligning this communication with people's beliefs. And identities now your book has just launched Tamsin for the audience to find out more about your book, your newsletter, which I subscribe to, where would you send them to?

[00:53:40] Tamsen Webster: So . Everything about the book is at little change book. com since that's a little bit easier to remember than the title. So little change book. com. . And then,. Messagedesigninstitute. com is where these principles are going to come to life. And you can find me at Tamsyn Webster on most social platforms.

[00:53:57] Mahan Tavakoli: Find your red thread is outstanding. as well as say what they can't on here. Principles of lasting change. Thank you so much for this conversation. Tansen Webster. 

[00:54:11] Tamsen Webster: My pleasure.

 Thank you so much for having me.