New series
The culture change papers — why the dominant approach doesn't work, and what does.
Nine posts drawn from the research paper Envision, Diagnose, Design (McGregor, 2025) — the theoretical and empirical case for a behaviour-first approach to organisational culture change.
Organisations don't have culture problems.
Calling it a culture problem is part of the problem. When culture became a noun, it became something to measure and fix rather than build.
Why seventy percent of culture change initiatives fail.
Kotter put the failure rate at 70% in 1995. It hasn't improved. The reason is structural — and fixable.
The card is doing more than you think.
The physical card isn't a delivery mechanism. It's a participant in the room — and that distinction changes everything.
Psychological safety is usually built wrong.
Most approaches to psychological safety depend on facilitator skill. There's a more reliable architectural alternative.
The silence that means agreement.
Everyone privately knows. Everyone assumes everyone else is fine with it. So no one says anything. Until the cards arrive.
Behaviour change precedes belief change. Not the other way around.
Every culture programme assumes the same sequence: change minds, behaviour follows. The evidence says it's backwards.
What your frontline sees that your leadership team doesn't.
Senior leaders and frontline staff see different cultures. That gap is structural — and most diagnostics make it worse.
Why the group decides. And why that's the only way it sticks.
People value what they build more than what they're given. Applied to groups building their own culture map, this explains why commitment follows.
Envision first. Always.
Most culture programmes start with what's wrong. Five years of field observation suggest the sequence should always be reversed.
