When leaders introduce a shift—be it a revised strategy, an organisational restructure, or a cultural change—the challenge often isn’t the change itself. It’s gaining genuine support from the people expected to implement it. This goes beyond compliance. True buy-in means that employees don’t simply go along with the decision, they take ownership of it.

That distinction has real consequences. Compliance may help an initiative begin, but it rarely sustains progress. Commitment, on the other hand, keeps momentum alive even through uncertainty. Yet leaders often mistake silence or passive agreement for support. Without real alignment, even the most logical or well-planned change can struggle to take root.

Psychology provides useful clues. The social identity approach helps explain why groups—not just individuals—resist change. In workplaces, teams develop shared norms, roles, and a collective sense of “who we are.” When change threatens that identity, resistance tends to emerge as a group response. Employees might feel their status, their competence, or their place in the hierarchy is being undermined. This triggers identity protection behaviours, often aimed at preserving the familiar over embracing the new.

Resistance, then, is not merely pushback or obstruction. It is a dynamic, socially reinforced process. It reflects both how people see themselves and how they interpret their place in the organisation. Employees respond to perceived threats using self-enhancement strategies, actions intended to protect self-worth and group identity. Leaders, too, are susceptible. When their identity is wrapped up in the change itself, criticism may feel personal, triggering defensive reactions.

Why people resist: it's the how, not the what

Often, people don’t oppose the change itself, but rather what it implies. Many worry about losing influence, status, control, or comfort. These concerns, often labelled person-oriented resistance, stem from anticipated consequences. At the same time, some employees express principle-oriented resistance: a belief that the change could harm the organisation’s goals or values. These objections aren’t necessarily rooted in self-interest. They may actually reflect a deeper commitment to the company’s purpose.

Another layer of resistance is aimed not at the content of the change, but at how it’s being managed. Studies show that low-quality communication—both top-down and bottom-up—leads to a breakdown in trust. Employees may feel excluded from decision-making, or that their feedback is not genuinely considered. This is especially pronounced in contexts like mergers, where team identities can be tied to legacy structures. People who feel disconnected from those leading the change may assume that power and information are being concentrated elsewhere.

The role of the leader, then, is to interpret resistance accurately and respond thoughtfully. Too often, change leaders underestimate how others perceive the process, and fail to recognise how their own identity might influence their reactions. Calls for feedback may come across as tokenistic if employee input is neither acted on nor communicated across leadership groups.

A real-world example: Rosalind Brewer and Walgreens' transformation

A compelling example of change leadership can be found in Rosalind Brewer, who served as CEO of Walgreens Boots Alliance from 2021 to 2023. Brewer took the helm during a turbulent time: the COVID-19 pandemic had put immense strain on retail pharmacy chains, employee burnout was at a peak, and Walgreens faced increasing competition from tech-enabled health companies. Rather than rely solely on traditional solutions, Brewer launched a bold strategic pivot toward becoming a comprehensive healthcare provider. This included major investments in VillageMD to open hundreds of in-store primary care clinics, digitalising the customer experience, and redesigning the internal talent strategy to prioritise collaboration and frontline empowerment. Her leadership style was notably people-centric—emphasising inclusion, communication, and accountability.

Brewer’s success lay not just in her vision, but in her ability to generate authentic buy-in across multiple levels of the organisation. She ensured that frontline employees understood how changes would benefit patients and staff alike, framing the transformation not as disruption, but as mission-driven care. She communicated openly about uncertainty and timelines, encouraging teams to co-create solutions rather than impose top-down directives. By recognising team identities and giving visibility to progress, she maintained engagement even during restructuring. Brewer’s strategy helped Walgreens reposition itself as not just a retailer, but a future-forward healthcare platform—powered by its people.

Eight simple steps to build commitment during change

To shift from resistance to engagement, leaders need to approach change through the lens of identity, participation, and communication. These are not soft factors—they’re decisive ones. And while the nuances may vary by organisation or sector, several principles consistently improve the likelihood of genuine buy-in. As you can see, most of these are about transparent, empathetic communication.

Explain the “why” clearly.

 People are more likely to support a change when they understand the problem it’s trying to solve. Link decisions to real challenges or shared goals, not abstract ambitions or technical fixes.

Invite people to shape the “how.”

 Participation in designing the solution increases commitment. Involving employees in planning or piloting change initiatives builds trust and drives ownership.

Identify and engage informal influencers.

 Influence does not always follow the org chart. Engage respected individuals within teams early on—they help spread understanding and shift mindsets from within.

Acknowledge uncertainty honestly.

 Overstating confidence can erode credibility. Leaders who admit what they don’t yet know—and commit to working through it with the team—strengthen psychological safety.

Celebrate small wins.

 Recognising progress, not just results, sustains engagement. Acknowledging effort reinforces motivation and signals that people’s contributions matter.

Recognise group identities, not just individuals.

 In situations such as mergers or restructuring, allow people to maintain links to their original team or unit identity while integrating them into a larger organisational vision.

Make participation meaningful.

 When asking for feedback, ensure responses are genuinely considered. Communicate what was heard, what was implemented, and why some ideas weren’t.

Keep the mission visible.

 Anchor decisions in the wider organisational purpose. When people can see how change supports long-term goals, their sense of meaning and direction is more likely to stay intact.