To Change Company Culture, Start with One High-Impact BehaviorSKIP TO CONTENTHarvard Business Review LogoHarvard Business Review LogoOrganizational change|To Change Company Culture, Start with One High-Impact BehaviorSubscribeSign InLatestMagazineTopicsPodcastsStoreReading ListsData & VisualsCase SelectionsHBR ExecutiveSearch hbr.orgSubscribeLatestPodcastsThe MagazineStoreWebinarsNewslettersAll TopicsReading ListsData & VisualsCase SelectionsHBR ExecutiveMy LibraryAccount SettingsSign InExplore HBRLatestThe MagazinePodcastsStoreWebinarsNewslettersPopular TopicsManaging YourselfLeadershipStrategyManaging TeamsGenderInnovationWork-life BalanceAll TopicsFor SubscribersReading ListsData & VisualsCase SelectionsHBR ExecutiveSubscribeMy AccountMy LibraryTopic FeedsOrdersAccount SettingsEmail PreferencesSign InHarvard Business Review LogoOrganizational changeTo Change Company Culture, Start with One High-Impact Behavior by James Elfer, Siri Chilazi and Edward ChangJanuary 19, 2026Illustration by Diana BoltonPostPostShareSaveBuy CopiesPrintSummary.   Leer en españolLer em portuguêsPostPostShareSaveBuy CopiesPrintBehavior is at the heart of nearly every challenge in the workplace, from leadership and fair decisions to high performance and AI adoption. But how should organizations go about influencing behavior? Most HR and leadership teams follow an intuitive model—they inform and inspire with education and communication campaigns, and they build capability with training and development programs. On the face of it, that seems like a watertight strategy. After all, if people are informed that a change is good for them and are given the capabilities to make that change, then surely change will happen.James Elfer is the founder of MoreThanNow, a behavioral-science practice that helps leaders and HR teams design better workplaces. He is also a research fellow at Harvard Kennedy School and a visiting senior fellow at the London School of Economics.Siri Chilazi is a senior researcher at the Women and Public Policy Program at Harvard Kennedy School, where she studies fairness and gender equality in the workplace. Her work focuses on debiasing organizational structures through behavioral design. She is the coauthor, with Iris Bohnet, of Make Work Fair: Data-Driven Design for Real Results (Harper Business, 2025).ECEdward Chang is an assistant professor in the Negotiation, Organizations & Markets Unit at Harvard Business School and a member of the Inclusion Lab.PostPostShareSaveBuy CopiesPrintRead more on Organizational change or related topics Talent management, Human resource management, Experimentation, Developing employees, Employee performance management, High potential employees, Organizational learning, Innovation and ManagementPartner CenterStart my subscription!Explore HBRThe LatestAll TopicsMagazine ArchiveReading ListsCase SelectionsHBR ExecutivePodcastsWebinarsData & VisualsMy LibraryNewslettersHBR PressHBR StoreArticle ReprintsBooksCasesCollectionsMagazine IssuesHBR Guide SeriesHBR 20-Minute ManagersHBR Emotional Intelligence SeriesHBR Must ReadsToolsAbout HBRContact UsAdvertise with UsInformation for Booksellers/RetailersMastheadGlobal EditionsMedia InquiriesGuidelines for AuthorsHBR Analytic ServicesCopyright PermissionsAccessibilityDigital AccessibilityManage My AccountMy LibraryTopic FeedsOrdersAccount SettingsEmail PreferencesHelp CenterContact Customer ServiceExplore HBRThe LatestAll TopicsMagazine ArchiveReading ListsCase SelectionsHBR ExecutivePodcastsWebinarsData & VisualsMy LibraryNewslettersHBR PressHBR StoreArticle ReprintsBooksCasesCollectionsMagazine IssuesHBR Guide SeriesHBR 20-Minute ManagersHBR Emotional Intelligence SeriesHBR Must ReadsToolsAbout HBRContact UsAdvertise with UsInformation for Booksellers/RetailersMastheadGlobal EditionsMedia InquiriesGuidelines for AuthorsHBR Analytic ServicesCopyright PermissionsAccessibilityDigital AccessibilityManage My AccountMy LibraryTopic FeedsOrdersAccount SettingsEmail PreferencesHelp CenterContact Customer ServiceFollow HBRFacebookX Corp.LinkedInInstagramYour NewsreaderHarvard Business Review LogoAbout UsCareersPrivacy PolicyCookie PolicyCopyright InformationTrademark PolicyTerms of UseHarvard Business Publishing:Higher EducationCorporate LearningHarvard Business ReviewHarvard Business SchoolCopyright ©2026 Harvard Business School Publishing. All rights reserved. Harvard Business Publishing is an affiliate of Harvard Business School.

The article "To Change Company Culture, Start with One High-Impact Behavior" by James Elfer, Siri Chilazi, and Edward Chang challenges the conventional wisdom that organizational change can be achieved through broad educational campaigns or training programs alone. The authors argue that while these methods are often employed to inform employees and build capabilities, they frequently fail to translate knowledge into sustained behavioral change. This disconnect arises because human behavior is influenced by a complex interplay of psychological, social, and environmental factors that cannot be addressed through top-down communication or generic skill development. Instead, the authors propose a more targeted approach: identifying and prioritizing a single high-impact behavior that can serve as a catalyst for broader cultural transformation. By focusing on specific actions rather than abstract concepts, organizations can create measurable progress in addressing deep-seated issues such as leadership inefficiencies, biased decision-making, and resistance to innovation.

Elfer, Chilazi, and Chang emphasize that behavior is the cornerstone of workplace dynamics, shaping everything from individual performance to collective organizational outcomes. They highlight that challenges like unfair treatment, stagnant innovation, and poor AI adoption are not merely technical or procedural but fundamentally rooted in human behavior. Traditional strategies for addressing these issues—such as workshops, policy updates, or diversity initiatives—are often ineffective because they fail to account for the psychological barriers that prevent individuals from acting on new knowledge. For instance, even when employees are trained to recognize unconscious biases, they may still perpetuate them due to ingrained habits or structural incentives. The authors contend that this gap between intention and action underscores the need for interventions that directly alter behavior through mechanisms such as feedback loops, social norms, and environmental redesign.

The article critiques the assumption that education alone is sufficient for change, noting that knowledge does not always translate to behavior. While training programs and communication campaigns can raise awareness, they often lack the specificity required to address the unique behavioral challenges within an organization. Elfer, Chilazi, and Chang argue that this approach is akin to "spray-and-pray" tactics, where efforts are spread too thin across multiple areas without a clear focus on high-leverage behaviors. Instead, they advocate for a data-driven methodology that identifies the most critical behaviors—those with the greatest potential to influence cultural norms and organizational outcomes. For example, in a workplace struggling with inclusivity, the high-impact behavior might be actively seeking diverse perspectives during decision-making processes. By concentrating resources on refining and reinforcing this specific action, organizations can create a ripple effect that gradually reshapes broader cultural attitudes.

The authors draw on insights from behavioral science to emphasize the importance of context in shaping behavior. They note that human actions are often driven by automatic, habitual responses rather than deliberate decision-making. This means that even well-intentioned individuals may fail to act in alignment with organizational values if their environment does not support such behavior. For instance, a company may promote collaboration through training, but if the reward system prioritizes individual achievement, employees will continue to prioritize self-interest. To counter this, the authors recommend designing interventions that align with the natural inclinations of employees, such as leveraging social proof (e.g., highlighting examples of successful behavior) or structuring environments to make the desired action easier. This approach requires a deep understanding of the psychological and social dynamics at play, which is where behavioral science expertise becomes critical.

Elfer’s background in behavioral-science practice and Chilazi’s research on fairness and gender equality in the workplace provide a foundation for the article’s recommendations. Their work underscores the importance of debiasing organizational structures through targeted behavioral design, such as implementing checks to reduce discrimination in hiring or decision-making processes. Similarly, Edward Chang’s expertise in negotiation and organizational markets highlights the role of incentives and power dynamics in shaping behavior. Together, these perspectives reinforce the idea that cultural change must be approached as a series of interconnected behavioral interventions rather than isolated initiatives.

The article also addresses the limitations of traditional HR and leadership strategies, which often rely on a "one-size-fits-all" model. Elfer, Chilazi, and Chang argue that this approach neglects the variability of human behavior across different roles, departments, or cultural contexts. For example, a leadership training program designed for executives may not be effective for frontline employees, who face distinct challenges and pressures. Instead, the authors suggest that organizations should engage in iterative experimentation to identify which behaviors are most impactful in specific contexts. This could involve pilot programs, data analytics, or feedback mechanisms to test and refine interventions before scaling them across the organization.

A key takeaway from the article is that cultural change requires a shift in focus from abstract goals to concrete actions. Rather than aiming for vague improvements like "increasing innovation" or "enhancing inclusivity," leaders should pinpoint specific behaviors that directly contribute to these outcomes. For instance, fostering innovation might involve encouraging risk-taking or cross-functional collaboration, while promoting inclusivity could entail ensuring equal participation in meetings. By making these behaviors visible and actionable, organizations can create a shared understanding of what success looks like and how to achieve it.

The authors also caution against the pitfalls of over-reliance on top-down mandates, which often fail to account for the complexity of human behavior. While leadership plays a crucial role in setting the tone for cultural change, sustained impact requires embedding desired behaviors into the fabric of daily operations. This might involve revising performance metrics to reward behaviors that align with organizational values, or redesigning physical and digital workspaces to encourage collaboration. By integrating behavioral interventions into existing systems, organizations can create a self-reinforcing cycle where the desired behavior becomes the default.

Finally, the article underscores the importance of patience and persistence in behavioral change. The authors acknowledge that shifting cultural norms is a gradual process that requires continuous refinement and adaptation. They recommend a phased approach, starting with small-scale experiments to test the effectiveness of targeted interventions before scaling them up. This iterative process allows organizations to learn from failures, adjust strategies based on real-world feedback, and build momentum for larger transformations.

In conclusion, the article presents a compelling case for rethinking traditional approaches to organizational change by prioritizing high-impact behaviors. By focusing on specific actions rather than broad initiatives, leveraging insights from behavioral science, and aligning interventions with the realities of human psychology, organizations can create more effective and sustainable cultural transformations. The authors’ recommendations challenge leaders to move beyond surface-level solutions and embrace a deeper, more nuanced understanding of how behavior shapes organizational success.