88% of change fails. How to be in the 12%, Part 1

We Not Me turns 150 episodes old this month, and Dan Hammond and Pia Lee are using the milestone to talk about something every leader running a transformation is quietly grappling with: why 88% of organisational transformations fail — up from 70% not long ago. Prompted by a Forbes article on the subject, they dig into why "transformation" so often becomes corporate shorthand for restructuring, downsizing, or otherwise firing people, and why that confusion poisons trust before the real work even starts.The conversation centres on Charles Handy's sigmoid curve — the idea that any curve of growth eventually turns downward, and that a new curve must be started while the old one is still rising, not after it's collapsed. Dan and Pia unpack why this is so hard in practice: leaders can see the need for change most clearly, but their teams are always a few steps behind on the emotional journey. Drawing on Elisabeth Kübler-Ross's stages of grief and William Bridges' distinction between change and transition, they argue that transformation isn't a communications exercise — it's an individual, leader-led process of helping people let go of identity, status, and habit before they can move toward something new.Key Themes & TakeawaysTransformation failure rates have climbed from 70% to 88% — and much of that is definitional: restructuring, downsizing, and "realignment" get dressed up as transformation, which employees correctly read as "you're fired," not "you're transformed."Charles Handy's sigmoid curve shows that a new curve must start before the current one peaks — but because performance looks fine on the way up, leaders struggle to convince anyone that change is urgent until it's too late.The transition zone between two curves is genuinely painful: old and new parts of the business end up competing for resources and legitimacy, with the "old" side feeling like the unwanted stepchild funding a new venture that isn't yet profitable.People don't just resist change intellectually — they move through denial, anger, and bargaining before reaching acceptance, and no two people move through that cycle at the same speed.Defining the new curve requires clarity on three things: what you're aiming for (clarity), the climate/culture needed to get there, and the competence — skills and behaviours — the organisation doesn't yet have.Leaders often assume the organisation will change while they personally stay the same — a fallacy that, left unchecked, is itself a predictor of ending up in the 88%."Change fatigue" is real, especially when sigmoid curves land too close together — teams that haven't finished processing one change get hit with the next before they've found solid ground.Three Reasons to ListenListen if you've ever announced a change, moved on, and wondered months later why nothing actually shifted — this episode explains why communication isn't leadership.Listen if you're leading a transformation and privately think you'll be able to stay the same while everyone around you changes — Dan and Pia explain why that's a fallacy that quietly sinks change efforts.Listen if your team seems to be dragging its feet on a change you think is obviously right — the sigmoid curve explains why leaders are always further along the emotional curve than their teams, and what to do about the gap.Notable Quotes"It is the line of all things human — of our own lives, of organizations and businesses, of governments, empires and alliances, of democracy itself." — Dan Hammond, quoting Charles Handy"Organizations change and people transition." — Pia Lee, citing William Bridges"If you're leading change and you haven't changed, well, you're probably going to fit into the 88% (who will fail)." — Pia Lee