Skip to content
A better read on internal communication
Sponsored

Are you creating compliance when you want engagement?

Explaining a change can help people understand it. But understanding isn't the same as taking ownership. Organizational psychologist Lindsey Caplan explores the difference.

Copy article as textCopy with discussion prompt

Summarise the main argument in three bullets. Distinguish evidence from opinion. Ask about my role and organisation, then help me explore what I could apply and what might not fit.

Share to LinkedInShare to XCopy linkShare by email

Are you creating compliance when you want engagement?

The transformation team was discussing incentives. A new technology would require tens of thousands of employees to change how they worked. There were suggestions of rewards and competitions. Lindsey Caplan thought the conversation had moved too far ahead.

In our conversation, she recalled asking the team to stop. Employee focus groups had already surfaced a concern: people resisted when change was being done to them rather than with them. Now the team was considering more ways to push.

Caplan went to the whiteboard and drew four quadrants. Before deciding how to incentivize adoption, she wanted the team to settle a question: did this change call for compliance or engagement? Was the goal for employees to comply with a new requirement, or to become active participants in making the change work?

Both can be legitimate goals. But they require different approaches. If the organization wanted employees to take ownership of the change, would another set of incentives get them there?

Once they chose engagement, she said, decisions became easier. They had something to work from when considering change champions, employee involvement, and how to present the technology.

Four different effects

Caplan began as a Hollywood screenwriter, then worked in learning and development and studied organizational psychology. Her forthcoming book, Moved: The Art and Science of What Moves Us & How to Move Others, asks what gets groups to care, participate, and act.

The Moved Model identifies four effects we can create in groups: compliance, informing, entertaining, and engaging. They each emerge from two dimensions of influence: Push versus Pull, and One-Size-Fits-All versus Personalized.

Push directs people toward a response; Pull invites them to participate. One-Size-Fits-All approaches could be directed at anyone, while Personalized approaches connect with the particular people involved. The model helps leaders examine whether the way they're approaching a group makes the response and the behavior they want more or less likely.

The Moved Model showing four approaches to influencing groups.
The Moved Model. © Lindsey Caplan. Explore the model

In her August newsletter, Caplan applied the model to AI adoption. A mandate may produce compliance. Training may inform. A demonstration may entertain. Engagement, however, is about what happens next: whether people begin experimenting, finding applications in their own work, and sharing what they discover without being continually pushed.

The distinction isn’t that one effect is always better than another. An AI rollout may require mandatory rules alongside opportunities for employees to experiment. The important question is whether the approach matches the response the organization needs.

In her work with executives, Caplan sees leaders asking for lasting commitment and ownership while communicating in ways that ask people to fall into line. They already understand the decision and agree with it. Employees are starting somewhere different.

“I told them, and why didn't they get it?” is how she described the frustration.

She described her Moved Model’s value as a shared language: a way to discuss what isn’t working without making it personal. Rather than simply asking whether a message was clear or compelling, teams can ask whether they are creating the conditions for the response and behavior they actually want.

Who could people become?

The technology would replace some of the ways people did their jobs. A presentation of features could show what the technology did while leaving people unsure of their own place alongside it.

“Who could they become now with this technology?” Caplan asked.

How could their work change? What new opportunities might they have?

The communication explored how their work could look six months ahead, helping employees see themselves in the change.

This was a shift from explaining the technology to helping people imagine what it could make possible for them. Rather than treating employees as an audience for the change, it gave them a way to picture their own future within it. The point was to design for participation and ownership, rather than assume employees would follow from a well-delivered announcement.

When we spoke, the rollout was still underway.

Working with the executive

Caplan is careful about the pressure leaders are under. An executive pushing for adoption may be responding to a board or stakeholders demanding progress.

“When we feel pushed, we tend to want to push others,” she said. It’s often our default approach.

Caplan suggests finding out what matters to the executive and involving them in working through the problem.

Rather than immediately changing the communication plan, internal communicators can help leaders clarify the effect they’re trying to create and whether their current approach is likely to produce it.

Before the next adoption announcement, you could work through these questions together:

  • What do employees need to do because it’s required, and where do they have room to choose?
  • What do they need to understand, and what might they need to experience for themselves?
  • Where are we asking people to follow instructions, and where do we want them to take ownership?
  • How can we give employees a meaningful role in shaping what happens next?

These questions shift the conversation from what leaders want to tell people to what they want people to do, feel, or change—and what role employees can play in getting there.

Before the next change announcement, ask: what kind of response are we trying to create? And are we designing for that response, or simply hoping it will happen?


About Lindsey Caplan

Engraved portrait of Lindsey Caplan

Lindsey Caplan is a former screenwriter turned organizational psychologist, and author of Moved: The Art and Science of What Moves Us & How to Move Others, publishing March 9, 2027, from Amplify Publishing Group.

She’s a sought-after speaker and advisor whose work explores what moves groups emotionally and behaviorally.

She holds a master’s degree in organizational psychology from Teachers College, Columbia University, and a bachelor’s degree in communication and creative writing for the media from Northwestern University.

The book is available for pre-order. You can also visit Lindsey’s website or connect with her on LinkedIn.

Notes

Evidence basis

are-you-creating-compliance-when-you-want-engagement

Read next

What’s in a project name?

Rachael Warner

perspectives

Building a better comms planning tool

perspectives

Change fatigue: the crisis hiding in plain sight

Helen Baldwin

perspectives

Have something to share from your work?

Strictly Internal brings together stories and perspectives from internal communicators, practitioners, and people who understand how organisations work. We'd love to hear from you and help tell your story.

Share your story

Subscribe to the briefings

Practical insights and field cases every two weeks on Mondays. Roles, skills and career perspective every Thursday.

Subscribe
Skip to content

Enable JavaScript to subscribe

Your email hasn’t been submitted. Enable JavaScript and reload this page, or contact us for help.

Contact usReload this page

A better read on
internal communication.

Practical ideas for your work. Roles, skills and perspective for your next step.
Written for internal communicators, and free to read.

Read by 5,600+ IC professionals.

Complete your profile

Share a little about your work to help make Strictly Internal more useful for you.

What would you like to read about? *Choose all that apply

Planned investments in the next 12 months *

0 / 1,000

Your answers will be saved to your subscriber profile. See our privacy policy for details. Company details are used in aggregate; names and affiliations aren’t shared.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Your profile is complete

Here’s what you can look forward to as a subscriber.

Field Notes

Mondays

Practical ideas, tools and conversations for your work in internal communication.

Career Brief

Thursdays

Roles worth a closer look, career perspectives, and what the job market signals about the future of internal communication.

You haven’t been added yet

We couldn’t complete this signup. Try another email address, or get in touch and we’ll help.

Try another email

Need a hand? Contact us.