What are the truths your organisation is afraid to speak? In this fifth instalment of our Unsaid Truths series, we continue to dissect the cultural friction points that keep teams from reaching their potential.
Drawing on 18 months of intensive programming with over 3,500 professionals throughout ASEAN, we’re bringing the unspoken into the light. It’s time to move past the corporate veneer and address the realities that matter.
I regularly hear from leaders that “my people are resistant to change.” In general, it’s one of the most common, and in my own opinion, most misleading, explanations leaders reach for when initiatives stall, energy dips, or conversations become strained.
In reality, most staff don’t resist change itself. They resist what change threatens to take away: comfort, clarity, status, security, and voice. What looks like resistance is often a signal that someone feels unsafe in the transition.
The issue here is that when leaders label this as resistance, they miss the real message that’s being transmitted, which unfortunately can lead to making the problem worse.
Resistance is an emotional signal, not a character flaw
Across the organisations that Simia has worked with, the same pattern shows up again and again. New systems, new structures, new expectations roll out with speed and logic. On paper, they make sense. Strategically, they’re sound.
Yet on the ground, people hesitate. Questions repeat. Energy drops. Some disengage quietly. Others push back more openly. This isn’t stubbornness. It’s uncertainty.
People are asking, often silently:
- Do I still belong here?
- Am I still good at my job?
- Do I understand what’s expected of me now?
- Will I be supported if I struggle, or will I be judged?
When these questions go unanswered, uncertainty fills the space. Uncertainty and fear. Emotional charges that can show up as withdrawal, cynicism, compliance-without-commitment, or open resistance.
The leadership blindspot: assuming alignment rather than checking
One of the most damaging assumptions leaders make during change is that understanding equals alignment. Leaders are usually closer to the “why”. They’ve had more time to process the shift, debate the trade-offs, and emotionally adjust; allowing for ownership. Staff and middle managers are often handed the what and when and expected to catch up quickly.
This creates a gap:
- Leaders think they’ve communicated clearly.
- Staff experience ambiguity, pressure, or loss of control.
- Everyone feels frustrated, but for different reasons.
When leaders respond by pushing harder (“we’ve already explained this”), they unintentionally reinforce the very fear they’re trying to overcome.
What intelligent leaders do differently
Emotionally intelligent change leadership doesn’t mean slowing everything down or over-catering to discomfort. It means responding to resistance with curiosity instead of control. Effective leaders do three things consistently:
- They name what the challenge is
- Instead of pretending change is neutral or easy, they acknowledge the emotional cost. Naming uncertainty reduces it. Silence amplifies it.
- They translate change into lived impact
- Not just what’s changing, but what it means for workload, decision-making, performance expectations, and development. This is where most change efforts fail, because, even though the strategy might be clear, the daily reality is not.
- They create space for sense-making, not just updates
- Town halls and emails share information. They don’t create understanding. People need time and permission to ask, challenge, and process without being labelled “negative”. Feedback needs to be taken in a safe environment, allowing for the best insight for leaders.
From Resistance to Responsibility
The challenge lies in handling the resistance. What Simia has seen is that when leaders can see and treat the resistance as a data point, trust is built.
The shift is subtle but powerful:
- From “Why won’t they get on board?”
- To “What might they be afraid of losing? How can we address it?”
This is where responsibility replaces resistance. People are far more willing to move forward when they feel seen, supported, and equipped and not simply instructed.
Push back shouldn’t be seen as a failure of change
Change fails because leaders stop listening. Because management are not given the tools to succeed and staff do not feel safe. The organisations that have success in navigating change haven’t been the ones with the best frameworks or fastest rollouts.
They’re the ones whose leaders understand that progress is emotional before it’s operational.
Resistance isn’t the enemy. Feeling left behind is and that’s something leaders can do something about.