When an organization identifies a problem, we often look first for the one causing it. A sales team is failing to meet targets, so the salespeople need to learn to sell better. A team is struggling to work together, so there is a communication problem. A manager is having difficulty getting employees on board, so his leadership style needs to change.
Such a conclusion is understandable, but often tells only part of the story. After all, behavior always arises within a specific environment. The goals someone is given, the way work is organized, the expectations of a manager, and the freedom someone experiences to make choices all influence what someone ultimately does.
That is precisely why a good solution often begins with a different question: what makes this behavior logical at this moment?
Why do we look at the person so quickly?
We are naturally inclined to explain behavior from the perspective of the person themselves. In psychology, this is known as the fundamental attribution error: we easily attribute behavior to traits such as motivation, talent, or commitment, and are less likely to consider the circumstances in which that behavior arises.
Within organizations, this happens daily. An employee shows little initiative, and soon the conversation turns to ownership. An account manager capitalizes on few commercial opportunities, and his sales skills are discussed. A team struggles to collaborate, and communication needs to be improved. In doing so, we focus primarily on what someone does , whereas the more interesting question is often what drives them to do so.
How can an organization itself influence behavior?
The way an organization structures its work has a major influence on employee behavior. In this regard, people pay particular attention to what receives attention, is rewarded, and on what they are evaluated in practice.
Suppose an organization values ​​customer focus. At the same time, the manager focuses primarily on speed, volume, and productivity. This naturally creates tension. Employees hear that personal attention is important, but simultaneously feel that speed weighs heavily in their performance reviews.
When customers subsequently experience insufficient attention, it is natural to look at the employees. However, the cause can lie to a significant extent in the way of working.
Therefore, in the case of a persistent problem, it is valuable to investigate:
- which behavior is encouraged;
- on which employees are evaluated;
- which choices managers emphasize daily;
- how much space people experience to make different choices themselves.
Sometimes you discover that employees mainly do what the organization teaches them, consciously or unconsciously.
Why is one cause often too simple?
Organizational problems usually arise from a combination of factors that influence each other. A change in objectives, for example, can lead to different priorities. These priorities influence a team's behavior, and that behavior, in turn, affects results, collaboration, and customer contact.
As a result, a solution in one place may have insufficient effect. Training can provide employees with new skills, while working methods within the organization subsequently steer them back towards old behavior. Similarly, a new procedure can change little if responsibilities and expectations remain the same.
That is why, with a persistent problem, it helps to look beyond the initial explanation. Not only: what is going wrong? but also: why does this keep happening?
When does a solution really start to work?
A solution works better when it addresses the actual cause of the problem. This first requires a clear understanding of what is happening and which factors influence it.
Consider, for example:
- Behavior: What exactly is happening?
- Method: How is the work organized?
- Control: What goals and expectations does management set?
- Incentives: Which behavior is rewarded or encouraged?
- Collaboration: What influence do colleagues and mutual agreements have?
Only when that puzzle is sufficiently complete does it become clear where an intervention can truly make a difference. Sometimes training is the right solution. Sometimes the key lies in leadership, work processes, or responsibilities. Often, the problem calls for a combination.
What question do you ask before you solve a problem?
Strong leaders take the time to truly understand an issue. They look beyond incidents and individual performance and investigate which patterns keep recurring. Perhaps the most important question in this regard is: What circumstances cause this behavior to emerge again and again?
That perspective creates space for solutions that address the actual cause of a problem. Sometimes the key lies in leadership, sometimes in processes, sometimes in responsibilities, and often in a combination of these.
Do you recognize issues that keep recurring despite various interventions? Then it is worthwhile to look not only at the behavior, but also at the system within which that behavior arises.
Eric Peeters helps organizations make those underlying patterns visible, so that improvements not only have an effect in the short term, but also endure in the long term.
