Cohesion: The critical state before change
A lot of us are trying to create change in some sphere of our lives, and we're also pretty good at spotting when it needs to happen. On a larger scale, we can see when a culture has gone stale, when a system is producing the wrong behaviour, when trust has broken down, or when a group of people has stopped moving in the same direction. The harder work isn't seeing the need for change. The harder work is creating the conditions for people to believe in it, carry it, and keep going when the old pattern would be easier.
This is where cohesion matters.
Shifting the culture of a group doesn't happen overnight, and it rarely happens by demonising 'the other side'. We are watching that fail in politics here in Australia, and across the world: the louder the division becomes, the less room there is for people to move without feeling humiliated, exposed or pushed out of the group altogether. Reminiscent of schoolyard bullying, it might create heat. It does not create durable change.
Real change needs shared meaning - language that feels like it belongs to the people expected to use it, a plan clear enough that people know what changes in practice and not just in principle, and visible proof that the system is actually moving. Humans won't carry a story they didn't help shape, that doesn't sound or feel like them, and they won't blindly sustain a direction they cannot see gaining ground.
The research is consistent on this. Behaviour change isn't simply a matter of giving people better information. People need the ability to act, the conditions that enable action, and a reason to keep acting when the same familiar behaviour would be easier. Social norms research adds another layer: people are shaped by what they believe others do, expect, tolerate and reward. As social animals, we're always reading the room. Is this real? Will others back it? Does the system actually mean it? The answers to those questions determine whether change holds or quietly dissolves.
And this is why cohesion has to come before momentum. Not universal agreement - cohesion rarely means that. It means enough people can identify with the bigger picture, understand their role inside it, and trust that the change is not just a message being pushed from the top. Without that, people drift. They soften the language, avoid the harder conversations, interpret the strategy through old assumptions, or wait to see whether someone else moves first.
Language is central to this, and it is where many change efforts lose ground. Not polished messaging - the kind of language that helps people name what is changing, understand why it matters, and talk about it in their own rooms, or outside of the organisation, without needing the original author there to translate it. Co-creation is not a nice to have in this context. When people have shaped the language, they carry it differently. They defend it, refine it, and pass it on. When it's handed to them as a finished product, they treat it that way.
Then the part where the rubber meets the road - when the language has to become behaviour. That is where habits and rituals matter, and they are not the same thing. A habit creates repetition; whereas a ritual gives that repetition meaning, and is subsequently more resilient to pressure. Regular check-ins and rhythms can be useful (if they feel authentic); something that brings people back to what the organisation now values, what it is trying to become, and what decisions need to look like is more powerful. Rituals make change visible and they make it felt. They tell people: this is not a side project. This is how we work now.
The Rally Effect™ was deliberately built around this sequencing. Stakeholder-centred strategy comes first because change starts with the people and forces that shape belief. Narrative co-design follows because the story has to be built in language people can actually use, which means building it with them, not for them. Systemised activation turns that language into habits, rhythms, and rituals that the organisation can carry forward. Signal and sustain tracks whether clarity, belief, and momentum hold over time. The order matters because getting it wrong (starting with the story before the strategy is clear, or pushing execution before the narrative is shared) is one of the most consistent ways change initiatives fail.
That matters now because organisations are not being pressured from one direction; they are being pressured from every direction at once. Economic strain, trust deficits, workforce fatigue, political division, technology shifts and rising public scrutiny are not arriving in sequence - they are arriving together. The infrastructure has to hold.
Which means we have to stop treating strategy, culture, performance, leadership voice and reputation as separate problems with separate owners. A new strategy will not hold if the culture contradicts it. A performance push will not hold if people do not believe the direction. A brand will not hold if the internal reality cannot carry the external story.
Change holds when the whole system is designed to carry it: strategy, story, language, habits, rituals, leadership signals and proof. Alignment creates clarity. Cohesion creates the 'we'. Momentum comes after both.
Rally works with boards and leadership teams navigating significant strategic change, connecting the organisation's future direction with the collective leadership, culture and reputation required to deliver it.
Sources
Michie, S., van Stralen, M. M., & West, R. (2011). The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implementation Science. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-6-42
Bicchieri, C. (2016). Measuring Social Norms. Penn Social Norms Group. https://www.irh.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Bicchieri_MeasuringSocialNorms.pdf
UNICEF. (2021). Defining Social Norms and Related Concepts. https://www.unicef.org/documents/defining-social-norms-and-related-concepts
van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18605818/
Centola, D., & Macy, M. (2007). Complex Contagions and the Weakness of Long Ties. American Journal of Sociology. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/521848
Lally, P., van Jaarsveld, C. H. M., Potts, H. W. W., & Wardle, J. (2010). How are habits formed: Modelling habit formation in the real world. European Journal of Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.674
Hobson, N. M., Schroeder, J., Risen, J. L., Xygalatas, D., & Inzlicht, M. (2018). The Psychology of Rituals: An Integrative Review and Process-Based Framework. Personality and Social Psychology Review. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29130838/