WRITTEN BY ALICIA KOCH, FOUNDER OF THE LEGAL BELLETRIST
Have you ever heard the saying: “the grass is always greener on the other side” or “better the devil you know”? I have. Many times.
I’m not sure if it’s because I come from a religious Jewish family and the go-to was always to remain under the radar, always to be careful, always to stick with who and what we know. Never to wander too far, never to ask too many questions, never to rock the boat and certainly never to make drastic changes. Better the devil we know was the family motto.
It’s understandable. My grandparents – who I spent most of my time with – are from the WWII generation. Their friends and some of our family members escaped the camps. I heard the stories. It scared the hell out of me. So, I understood that safe was better. Safe meant sticking to the status quo. To what we knew.
But that’s before I became a teenager. Before I “knew” everything. Before I decided that safe was last century and that changing everything was all that mattered. I was rebellious. Part of me still is. Then again, I do have things to rebel against (but that’s a whole other story). The world seemed so big to me, while my little corner of the world seemed so small. The devil we know felt a little too familiar and I was looking for new devils to meet.
Change didn’t feel so scary. When I was younger. I learnt a great deal. Met some real-life devils that’s for sure. And eveeeenually found my place in the world. But it took an embracing of change to get here.
As I have aged and experienced the world, that desire for change has dissipated. My grandparents’ view of the world seems more understandable; more palpable. And I find that now, all I want is to feel safe. To keep those I love safe. To keep everything that means something to me safe. Maybe it’s because it isn’t just about me anymore. There’s more at stake.
And I have found that I am or am becoming fearful of my life changing in an instant. Because everything can change – *snap* – just like that. In a second. And that scares the bejesus out of me.
So, how have I reverted back to this old way of thinking? How have I become what I fought so hard against?
It’s in the Brain
There’s a part of the brain called the amygdala, a small almond-shaped structure located in the temporal lobe of the brain, specifically in the medial portion of each hemisphere, just anterior to the hippocampus. It is the part of the brain that is responsible for processing emotions, particularly fear and anxiety.
Neuroscientists have discovered that when it gets activated, the amygdala sends a distress signal to the hypothalamus. The hypothalamus functions like a command centre, communicating with the rest of the body through the nervous system so that the person has the energy to fight or flee (a stress response).
As you may have guessed, this fight or flight response has been deeply ingrained in our evolutionary history since forever, it’s what has kept us safe from potential threats for the last 300,000 years (or last 7 million years if you want to get technical and include the oldest hominins).
However, with modern day humans, this fight or flight response has become overused, impacting our ability to adapt and embrace new opportunities therefore being more of a hinderance than a help.
It’s Psychological
There are three main biases that affect our fear of change:
A cognitive bias called “the status quo bias.” It is what it sounds like – the bias for things to remain the same or that the current state of affairs remains the same. This bias minimises the risks associated with change, but it also causes people to miss out on potential benefits that might outweigh the risks.
The term “status quo bias” was first introduced by researchers William Samuelson and Richard Zeckhauser in 1988. In a series of controlled experiments, Samuelson and Zeckhauser found that people showed a disproportionate preference for choices that maintain the status quo.
In these experiments, participants were asked a variety of questions in which they had to take the role of decision-maker. It involved situations often faced by individuals, managers and government officials.
The results showed a strong bias in subjects’ responses. Specifically, when making an important decision, subjects were more likely to pick the option that maintained things as they were.
The reason for the status quo bias can be explained through “the loss aversion bias” – when considering potential choices, people often focus more on what they stand to lose rather than how they might benefit. According to the “prospect theory,” an economics theory developed by researchers Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky in 1979, “losses loom larger than gains.”3
In other words, the potential for loss stands out in people’s minds much more prominently than the potential for gains.
As an example, the research by Samuelson and Zeckhauser also found that younger workers were more likely to sign up for a health insurance plan that had better premiums and deductibles. Whereas older employees were more likely to stick with their old but less favourable plans.
Older employees may be more concerned with minimising any possible losses rather than risking everything on potential gains. They know what to expect from their current plan, so they may be less willing to accept the risks of a new plan, even though the switch might come with financial benefits.
Sort of like – better the devil you know. And I totally get it.
There is one more theory that has an effect on our fear of change and that is “the cognitive dissonance theory.”
The cognitive dissonance theory was hypothesised by Leon Festinger in 1957. The theory is based on the idea that two cognitions can be relevant or irrelevant to each other. Such cognitions can be about behaviours, perceptions, attitudes, emotions and beliefs. Often, one of the cognitions in question is about our behaviour. If the cognitions are relevant, they can be in agreement (consistent) or disagreement (inconsistent) with one another.
Discrepancy between an attitude and a behaviour – like eating a doughnut the day before going on a diet – leads to psychological discomfort called cognitive dissonance.
Cognitive dissonance leads to the motivation to reduce the dissonance. The stronger the discrepancy between thoughts, the greater the motivation to reduce it. There are four strategies used to reduce the discomfort of cognitive dissonance:
- We change our behaviour so that it is consistent with the other thought.
- We change one of the dissonant thoughts in order to restore consistency.
- We add other thoughts (consonant thoughts) that justify or reduce the importance of one thought and therefore diminish the inconsistency.
- We trivialise the inconsistency altogether, making it less important and less relevant.
There are two other factors that influence the magnitude of cognitive dissonance: whether you had some choice over the inconsistency and whether you expect the inconsistency to have negative consequences in the future. The more choice you had over the inconsistency and the worse the consequences, the stronger the dissonance will be.
It’s Emotional
Perhaps looking at the anatomy and psychology is tooooo analytical. It can just as easily be explained through our emotions because as humans we are emotional –
Fear of the unknown – with change comes uncertainty and I don’t know about you, but right now I tend to shy away from change because I’m anxious about what the result might be.
The moral force – people become so set in their ways that they honestly believe that the status quo is the right way to do things. Just like my grandparents – and now me – better the devil you know. We tend to cling strongly to the familiar, the tried and tested, to what is familiar and comfortable. It becomes “morally correct” – a term coined by noted psychologist Howard S. Friedman.
Fear of failure – another source of anxiety associated with change is the fear that any change will result in failure or even disaster. Like trading in your petrol car for an electric vehicle. Somewhere deep down we know that it’s better for the environment and that inevitably we will all one day be driving electric cars, but there is that fear – at least in South Africa – that there aren’t enough charging stations, and that we’ll get stranded because we couldn’t charge our car. In reality, it’s exactly the same as being stranded because we ran out of gas, but because it’s new and unknown, we immediately assume the worse – failure.
Apathy – sometimes people resist change simply because it takes effort. It takes effort to learn a new procedure and it takes work to adapt to change – like a diet and getting fit. It takes work. And sometimes people see the work or the effort as not worth it.
Mistrust of changemakers – many people resist change because they are wary of those advocating change. They may doubt the knowledge and credentials of those advocating the change, known as the changemakers. Why is changing so important to them – are there ulterior motives? Just like during COVID and with the COVID vaccines.
Reframing The Fear
Reframing our fears so we see them as opportunities is crucial if we want real change, so taking the fears, we listed above, let’s reframe them in a way that’s positive.
Fear of the unknown – knowing the full details about the situation is crucial. Being told what the benefits and drawbacks are can change the whole scenario for you. Always insist on clear and credible information so that you can make proper and informed decisions. This can help alleviate the fear of unknown outcomes caused by change.
The moral force – although combating a moral force is difficult it’s the presentation of evidence that the new way is better than the old way that will win the day. It sounds like an obvious thing. But showing the sceptic proof is key.
Fear of failure – providing assurances that a worst-case-scenario is unlikely is the best way to help people overcome their fear of failure.
Apathy – motivation is everything! Motivating a sceptic is critical for overcoming change-related apathy. Focusing on the desirable outcomes of a change process can help incentivise naysayers.
Mistrust of changemakers – changemakers must first establish their credibility. They need to be transparent and clear about the benefits and potential risks associated with the change, provide a good rationale for why people should change and monitor the change process while providing support.
The fear of change is a complex phenomenon that is influenced by many things – anatomical, psychological and emotional. But by understanding the underlying causes of our fear – of my fear – of change, we can implement small strategies to address them, thereby improving on our adaptability and flexibility as we navigate our way through the world.
Change is not only an external thing that needs to be monitored. It is an “inside job” that needs to be navigated with care. Embracing change as a natural and necessary part of growth and development is key to overcoming our fears and, as a result, achieving long-term success.
If you need help navigating your fear of change, book a consult with Frieda Levycky at Braving Boundaries today.
(Sources used and to whom we owe thanks: Psychology Today; Medium; LinkedIn; Harvard Health Publishing; Very Well Mind and Positive Psychology).
Click here to visit The Legal Belletrist website. Email: [email protected]