Recently, I came across an interesting research paper that not only reviewed multiple studies on the influence of communication in organizational change but also proposed a framework for implementing these changes in multicultural environments to raise the chances of success.

As companies become more diverse, understanding how culture shapes communication is essential for achieving successful change initiatives. Research on the role of communication in change efforts has developed in a fragmented way across loosely connected perspectives. Even to this day, little is known about why communication breakdowns occur or how cultural values among employees —known as change recipients— influence the success of these initiatives.

With this article, I will summarize the four key purposes of communication outlined in the paper and explore how to properly align them with cultural values to increase engagement and readiness for change. I’ll also provide the practical insights for leaders —known as change agents— on adapting communication strategies to minimize breakdowns and increase initiative success.

• Key Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions
• Power Distance
• Individualism vs collectivism
• Uncertainty avoidance
• Masculine vs feminine
• Key Communication Purposes
• Disrupting
• Strategy & Guidelines
• Envisioning
• Strategy & Guidelines
• Legitimizing
• Strategy & Guidelines
• Co-creating
• Strategy & Guidelines
• How to Avoid Communication Breakdowns
• Conclusion

Key Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions

It’s important first, to understand the key cultural dimensions that the paper identified from Hofstede’s dimensions. These dimensions will influence the effectiveness of our communication strategies if we are unprepared to adapt to them during a change initiative.

These dimensions are:

• Power distance
• Individualism vs collectivism
• Uncertainty Avoidance
• Masculinity vs Femininity

When communication is adapted and aligns with these cultural values, it increases employees’ readiness and the likelihood of success in the change initiative.

Power distance

In high power distance cultures, where unequal relationships in the workplace are accepted, individuals are more comfortable with centralized authority. In these cultures, employees are more likely to comply with top-down directives, especially when these come from leaders perceived as competent and authoritative.

By contrast, low power distance (egalitarian) cultures, top-down communication can be viewed as heavy-handed and untrustworthy. Employees in these cultures prefer a more participative approach, where decision-making is shared, and authority is distributed more equally.

Individualism vs collectivism

In high individualistic cultures, where personal goals, interests, and achievements are prioritized, communication should focus on answering the question “What’s in it for me?” to increase acceptance and readiness for change.

By contrast, collectivist cultures, employees are more responsive to solutions negotiated among colleagues, with an emphasis on achieving better collective outcomes. In these contexts, a co-creative communication approach, involving collaboration and group decision-making, is more effective.

Uncertainty avoidance

In high uncertainty avoidance cultures, individuals prefer detailed, step-by-step plans that explain how a change will be implemented. Therefore, it is more effective to clearly articulate a vision that also outlines the specific steps and milestones for achieving the change. People in these cultures are more receptive to unambiguous communication that minimizes uncertainty by providing clear, actionable instructions.

By contrast, low uncertainty avoidance cultures are more comfortable with flexible and open-ended communication. In these cultures, employees are more willing to embrace ambiguity, allowing them to link the future vision to past values and adapt it to their own interpretations.

Masculine vs feminine

In masculine cultures, individuals prioritize assertiveness, competition, achievement, and often adhere to well-defined gender roles. Communication in these cultures is more effective when it emphasizes ambition, success, and personal or organizational gains.

By contrast, feminine cultures value nurturing, cooperation and social responsibility, with less emphasis on rigid gender roles. Communication strategies based on pathos (focusing on values and emotions) are more impactful in these cultures, as people respond better to messages that emphasize emotional connection, collective well-being, and social harmony.

Key Communication Purposes

The paper defines four purposes of communication that have a different impact during a change effort based on the cultural orientation of the employees:

• Disrupting: Creating dissatisfaction with the status quo.
• Envisioning: Building a shared vision for the future.
• Legitimizing: Establishing credibility and trust.
• Co-creating: Fostering collaboration and ownership.

The research paper underscores the importance to answering the “who, what, where, why, and how” questions from the beginning of a change initiative. Different types of changes require specific communication strategies to ensure effectiveness.

These communication purposes relate to Lewin’s Unfreeze, Move, Refreeze Model Specifically, the disrupting and envisioning purposes relate to the “unfreeze” stage, while the legitimizing and co-creating relate to the “refreeze” stage.

Disrupting: creating urgency across cultures

Disrupting Communication
- Creating dissatisfaction with the status quo.

Disruptive communication aims at fomenting dissatisfaction of the current status quo by highlighting an immediate threat, creating a sense of urgency and inevitability about change. This relates to Lewin’s “unfreeze” stage, where existing beliefs are challenged to prepare for change and where discourse at this phase is important to unfreeze the status quo before moving to the next stages in Lewin’s model.

However, achieving this goal difficult. Leaders may overwhelm employees with excessive details or, conversely, provide vague messages that fail to build momentum. In addition, the inertia of the status quo is often underestimated, leading to frustration and disengagement among leaders resulting in the failure of the initiative

Poor communication increases resistance, especially if employees see the change as risky or threatening. To increase change readiness, leaders must prompt a cognitive shift by challenging shared assumptions. Disconfirming shared assumptions through disruptive communication should challenge assumptions and current issues by framing he crisis as caused by external factors like evolving technologies rather than internal failures.

Strategies & guidelines

Research Guideline 1

Disruptive communication by high-ranking executives are more likely to enhance change readiness among change recipients in higher power distance cultures than among those in low power distance.

Envisioning: the importance of a clear vision

Envisioning Communication
- Suggesting alternative organizational futures.

The envisioning phase of change communication process serves to convey the vision, goals, and desired outcomes of the initiative. By articulating these, leaders aim to gather support and minimize resistance. A clear vision helps guide the organization, though some studies suggest a more inspiring but ambiguous vision can be equally effective, depending on the organization’s cultural context.

The change process should be view as a continuous effort rather than a one-off action. Single or irregular communications fail to help employees fully grasp the implications of the change, leaving them unprepared and potentially confused. Instead, consistent, ongoing communication is necessary to reshape employees’ cognitive frameworks and increased change readiness while the a one-off dissemination of formal documents, for example, is not sufficient for employees to update their cognitive schemas.

The process should encompass a series of activities aimed to persuade people to the necessity for a change and this includes:

• Envisioning the new organizational reality,
• Communicating the vision to stakeholders and
• Engaging in discussions to make the vision clear and accessible.

Ultimately, the goal is for leaders to clarify the desired outcomes, ensure stakeholders understand the vision, and make the change actionable through clear, measurable objectives.

Strategies & guidelines

Research Guideline 2

Envisioning communication that emphasizes outcomes and gains at the individual level will achieve grater change readiness in cultures with high individualistic orientation.

Research Guideline 3

Envisioning communication that is more detailed is likely to have greater effect on change readiness among recipients with high uncertainty avoidance orientation.

Legitimizing: building trust and credibility

Legitimizing Communication
- Presenting the change imperative.

The third purpose of communication is to legitimize the change in the eyes of the recipients. To achieve this, leaders must highlight the positive aspects of the change while downplaying the negatives. This type of communication falls under three bases:

• Ethos based - focus on the “who”, driven by the credibility of the leaders
• Logos based - focus on the facts and logic to appeal the rational brain (System 2 as described by Daniel Kahneman’s)
• Pathos based - appealing to emotions and values (System 1 in Kahneman’s model)

The focus is to build credibility and acceptance of the change.

Successful strategies create continuity with past practices with past practices and consider the interests of both employees and leaders. Additionally, these strategies should remain proportionate to the situation to avoid appearing nervous or overreacting that would delegitimize the change initiative. Furthermore, studies about persuasion and social influence show that communications that are perceived as charismatic and eloquent increase the acceptance of the change initiative by the recipients.

Strategies & guidelines

Research Guideline 4

Legitimizing communications that use pathos-based arguments are more likely to increase change readiness on recipients in more feminine cultures.

Co-creating: generating engagement across cultures

Co-creating Communication
- Negotiating a new organizational reality.

Co-creation is a two-way communication process where employees and leaders negotiate the meaning and content of the change initiative. This approach emphasizes solution-focused dialogue, where decision-making and responsibility are shared with key employees. By involving those directly impacted, leaders gain insights into the best ways to implement the change within different sectors.

This method relies on conversation, driven by a bi-lateral involvement and participation, to increase support and identify the best path forward. The goal is to influence and understand through a continuous negotiation with the stakeholders rather than a top-down effort.

Some studies suggest conversations themselves are a key outcome of change, as they generate new ideas, extend discussions, and shape the change process. Under this view, conversations are not simply a tool, but a target, medium, and product of the organizational change.

Strategies & guidelines

Research Guideline 5

Co-creating communication with have greater impact on change readiness among cultures with high collectivistic cultures.

How to Avoid Communication Breakdowns

When the cultural differences inside an organization are substantial, this can increase the likelihood to have communication breakdowns during a change process. Following the Hofstede’s cultural dimensions we can derive a link between those dimensions and the recipients’ perception of the agent’s communications. In particular, breakdowns when agents ignore recipients gains and losses from a change, when they fail to maintain the organization’s core values and the failure to establish credibility.

The Impact of Personal Gains and Losses on Change Readiness

Research Guideline 6a

Change-related communication in individualistic cultures will be positively related to change readiness if it focusses on specific work activities.

Research Guideline 6b

Change-related communication in collectivistic cultures will be positively related to change readiness if it focusses on how the change will impact the subunit to which the recipients belong.

Success or failure in change implementation often arises when the interests of different groups—employees and leaders—differ significantly, and no common ground is found. Leaders focus on achieving the change, while employees are concerned with how it impacts them. Even when leaders meaningfully engage with employees, generally their interpretations of the change often differ, resulting in a breakdown.

Breakdowns also occur when leaders fail to address employees’ concerns, such as power, status, and personal interests. Ignoring these issues reduces change readiness, thus, it’s crucial for leaders to attend to these concerns throughout the process.

By doing so, leaders can broker a solution that satisfies all parties and develop a broad and flexible vision that reconciles differing interests, increasing support and readiness. Leaders who prioritize co-creation while maintaining intact the change’s goals tend to achieve greater success in other communication purposes such as disrupting, envisioning, and legitimizing. Conversely, treating recipients as passive targets rather than active participants increases the likelihood of communication breakdowns.

When talking about personal gains, there will be different personal interest if the culture is individualistic or collectivistic. In individualistic cultures, recipients are more independent and focus on how the change impacts their personal work activities. By contrast, collectivist cultures are more concerned with how the change affects their team or subunit as a whole.

Failure to maintain continuity with current core values

Research Guideline 7a

Communication that sets out a broader vision for a change is more likely to be positively related to change readiness in high uncertainty avoidance cultures.

Research Guideline 7b

Communication that connects the future vision to past values and aspirations is more likely to be positively related to change readiness in low uncertainty avoidance cultures.

Change initiatives can impact the core values and beliefs shared by recipients within an organization. These values act as the glue holding individuals together, and attempts to alter them often lead to resistance. Resistance is particularly likely when change is introduced preemptively to avoid a crisis, rather than in response to an emerging one.

Breakdowns occur when leaders fail to establish a sense of continuity with existing values, neglecting to clarify which values will remain and which will change, and why. Differences in individual values and beliefs can create competing narratives about the future that should emerge after the change, disrupting both the envisioning and disrupting stages of communication during the unfreezing phase. This can lead to recipients experiencing mixed feelings or disidentifying with the organization’s new identity. Therefore, leaders’ disruptive communication should not only answer why the need for the change, but also explain how the new values relates to the current ones.

To maintain a sense of continuity, leaders need to adapt their communication based on the uncertainty tolerance of the culture. In high uncertainty avoidance cultures, individuals experience heightened anxiety about change and disruption of the status quo. Here, leaders should communicate the unacceptability of the status quo using clear and structured communication that links new values to the old. By contrast, in low uncertainty avoidance cultures, a more ambiguous vision can be effective, allowing individuals to interpret and connect the new reality with the old, thus reducing uncertainty in their own way.

Inability to establish credibility

Research Guideline 8a

Communication will be more likely to oversell the significance of the change initiative in masculine cultures than in feminine cultures.

Research Guideline 8b

Communication that establishes leaders’ personal credibility is likely to have a greater impact on change readiness in feminine cultures than in masculine cultures.

Communication breakdowns often occur when change recipients compare current initiatives to past organizational changes. When leaders have a history of broken promises—whether intentional or not—recipients develop distrust, which reduces change readiness. This breach of trust is common when past initiatives were overpromised for just for persuasive effect or when past change initiatives failed to meet expectations set by over-optimistic leaders. Employees who feel unfairly treated are more likely to distrust the leaders and seek hidden motives behind proposed changes.

In situations where distrust exists, it’s crucial for change agents to address these concerns before seeking buy-in. Distrust also arises when employees perceive that previous changes were unsuccessful or poorly managed, leading them to question leadership’s competence and commitment. In such cases, leaders should communicate transparently, acknowledge past shortcomings, and balance both positive and negative aspects of the current initiative to rebuild credibility and momentum. If these efforts fail, the result will lead to cynicism and resistance to the change initiative.

Trust issues are particularly damaging in feminine cultures that value emotional closeness and mutual care over competitiveness. In these settings, change agents with a poor track record will face greater challenges in achieving co-creation and employee engagement.

Creating Change Readiness in Your Organization

To successfully implement change, it’s essential to foster a culture where employees feel prepared and supported to embrace new directions. Throughout this article, we’ve explored how culturally sensitive communication is necessary to achieve this readiness. By aligning communication strategies with employees’ cultural values, organizations can increase trust, acceptance, and engagement during transitions.

Creating a culture prepared for change is more than a single initiative; it is an ongoing commitment to communication that respects and integrates the cultural values of employees. The research discussed how communication strategies (disrupting, envisioning, legitimizing, and co-creating) are most successful when adapted based on key cultural dimension (power distance, individualism vs collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, masculine vs feminine).

By designing communication strategies that align with the organization’s cultural dimensions, leaders can significantly increase the odds of successful organizational change, increasing not only acceptance but also sustained engagement and readiness across all levels of the organization.