The Illusion of external agency
Another week, another bias that impacts our teams. This week I'm excited to look into the illusion of external agency. The illusion of external agency occurs when individuals or teams attribute the cause of an event to external factors. Daniel Gilbert's research found, "People typically underestimate their capacity to generate satisfaction with future outcomes...In three laboratory experiments, participants who were allowed to generate satisfaction with their outcomes were especially likely to conclude that an external agent had subliminally influenced their choice." (APA PsycNet) Reading this made me curious about how this bias could appear in teams as they go through changes.
During interviews with various departments, you will hear variations of us/them language. When we look at how this can impact organizational change, the illusion of external agency can lead to blaming/attributing external factors rather than looking inward. If allowed to fester, it can create a culture of victimhood within the organization. If we want to identify the bias in teams, it is essential to watch for language that indicates external attributions, such as "they made us do it" or "we had no control over the situation." Additionally, if team members are quick to point fingers or blame external factors for the failure to change, it can be a sign that the illusion of external agency is appearing. When working with large/complex, highly regulated environments, it can take time to tease out when the external agency is real or perceived. It takes more probing and leading with curiosity to understand which issues/processes/policies are in place because of regulation and which ones result from 'that is how we have always done it.'
Providing employees with the necessary skills and resources to navigate the change initiative successfully is essential and often requires alignment of the technical change and process changes or reaffirmations. When I am working with a team and the technology is changing, but the process is remaining, I like to look into WHY the process is staying the same. Then, in various communications, you can highlight the reason for retaining the existing process. It helps to reassure users that the reasoning is solid and intentional.
In my knowledge quest on this bias, I found researchers who have explored the illusion of external agency, including Joseph Grenny, who wrote about the phenomenon in the book, "Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When Stakes Are High." If you prefer to listen, Joseph explains the concept on the HBR podcast, The Best Teams Hold Themselves Accountable.
Since I was down this rabbit hole, I found and read work from Julie Battilana and Tiziana Casciaro, who has researched how individuals and teams can take ownership of change initiatives, which can help mitigate the illusion of external agency. In their article, The Network Secrets of Great Change Agents, they explain several strategies to identify and leverage different behavior profiles among teams. Their book, Power for All, is an excellent resource for understanding how team members view power (power to change, ability to influence, external forces).
