"Taking people with you" demystified: How to lead sustainable change

 

"We have to take people with us." I hear this phrase in companies even more often than "We need to make better use of synergies", "We need more alignment" and "Sorry, unfortunately we have a budget": sounds important, sounds right, but what does it actually mean in concrete terms? How do you get people on board so that they don't just nod and carry on as before, but actually fall in love with change?

After years of working with managers in various organizations and industries, it has become clear to me: The most effective leaders know exactly what people need at what stage - and adapt their approach accordingly. And this is exactly where the following model comes into play.

 

“We need to get people on board.” I hear this phrase in companies even more often than “We need more alignment” and “ Let’s scale this.” It sounds important; it sounds right. But what does it actually mean?

What does it actually mean to truly engage people, rather than just informing them and hoping that the rest will somehow fall into place?

After years of working with leaders in a wide variety of organizations, one thing has become clear to me: Those who lead change effectively not only know what the goal is, but also what people need at each stage. And that is exactly why I developed the 4C Model.

 

The Model: Four Phases You Can't Skip

People cannot skip this sequence. They must go through all four phases in order to truly embrace change and commit to it in the long term. The most common mistake in leadership is skipping phases—encouraging people to participate and take action before they’ve had a chance to understand and process the information. This is precisely what creates the resistance and alienation that leaders then struggle to manage.

 

Clarity: I understand what's happening.

People need the basics first. What’s changing? Why? When? Who is affected? This is a matter of communication—it’s about making sure everyone is on the same page.

The key point here is this: communicating promptly is better than communicating fully. If you wait until all the details are in, you lose valuable time—and during that time, rumors will fill in the gaps. An honest, clear message about what is already known, combined with an open approach to what has not yet been decided, is almost always the better course of action.

Formats: A well-written message, a clear presentation, a structured email update. A feedback channel isn’t required at this stage, but it becomes essential by phase two at the latest.

 

Consent: I have processed this and accept it.

Understanding is not the same as consent. Once people have the information, they need time and space to process it. To ask their genuine questions. To voice their concerns. Skepticism, resistance, even resentment: these aren’t problems that need to be managed away. They are signs that the consent phase is working.

This is precisely where the most common and costly mistake in transformation processes can be made: pushing people to take action too soon, before they’ve even had a chance to process the information. A town hall meeting that announces the change and immediately opens up for questions usually elicits superficial reactions, not genuine ones. Often, a deliberate pause is needed between the communication of clarity and the discussion of consent.

Formats: Workshops, moderated discussions, Q&A sessions with ample time for dialogue. Must be interactive and must allow sufficient time.

 

Contribution: I find my place and actively help shape things.

Once people have come to terms with the change, it becomes a practical matter. It’s no longer about attitude, but about behavior: How do we put this into practice? What should we try? Where do we work out the details together?

The manager has a clear task here: to identify what is truly open to discussion and what is not, and then to create genuine room for initiative. Genuine autonomy within a clearly defined scope is more motivating than broad but inconsequential participation.

Formats: Working groups with a realistic decision-making framework, co-design sessions, collaborative problem-solving, and peer discussions about initial experiments.

 

Continuity: This is how we work now.

During this phase, new behaviors become habits. What often happens here is that management’s attention has already shifted to the next initiative, while the team is still in the process of integrating the last one. This is the moment when changes get stuck halfway through.

What helps is consistent reinforcement: highlighting what has already changed, acknowledging progress, and keeping the change alive in the daily routine. Not as a one-time campaign, but as a continuous reminder that the new is truly the new.

Formats: Regular check-ins aligned with the team’s rhythm, peer-to-peer discussions about what works, stories, and visible data that make the change tangible. The moment that matters: when no one talks about “the change” anymore, because this is simply how we work here.

 

The real question for leaders

The model doesn’t ask, “Where is my team right now?” It asks different questions. What does my team need at each stage, and am I really providing that? Where are my own blind spots? Most leaders excel in one or two stages and systematically neglect the others.

Which phase do you handle well? Which one do you skip without realizing it?

Are you in the middle of a change process or planning your next step? If you’d like, we can take a look at it together. Feel free to reach out.