OTT Issue #16: Social Threats = Physical Danger? Your Brain Thinks So.

Humans are funny creatures. Even if we aren’t in imminent physical danger, our bodies can still send us signals like we are.?

“Holy cats!” our neurological system transmits, “our next one-on-one meeting is probably going to include an extremely stressful conversation. That’s pretty much the same as being chased by a saber-toothed tiger. Red alert! All systems engage!”?

Next thing you know you’re so sweaty you need to change your shirt, and it feels like you might pass out…or throw up…or throw something,?even though nothing bad has even happened yet.

Turns out, this is totally your brain’s fault. Advances in neuroscience over the past couple of decades have discovered that our brains interpret perceived social threats the same way they interpret threats to our survival.?

Nice one, science! But brains…what are y’all doing??

I mean…if my brain can’t distinguish between an embarrassing encounter with my boss and fleeing from a ravenous predator, is it really qualified to be in charge? Of course, I don’t really have a good replacement candidate lined up, so I guess it’s better to have someone driving than an empty skull.?

This begs the question, if social peril = regular peril as far as our brains are concerned, what does that mean??

Happily, neuroscientist David Rock came up with a helpful acronym to document the kinds of social threats that are serious enough to make our brains issue the fight, flight, or freeze response more commonly associated with bodily harm.?

Just think SCARF:?

• Status
• Certainty
• Autonomy
• Relatedness
• Fairness

Any threat – real or imagined – to these aspects of our social universe can set off the same triggers our ancestors used to run away from stuff with big claws and teeth.?

Status?means our spot on a hierarchy or our place in the community. Anything that seems to undermine my authority or diminish my importance relative to others is a major danger signal.?

Certainty?is our sense of consistency, or the feeling that we can confidently predict what’s coming next, especially when it comes to our essential needs. When cause and effect don’t seem connected, we get antsy.?

Autonomy?is the feeling that we have some influence over what’s going on around us, including events and our environment. We like to feel that we have some choices.

Relatedness?refers to how connected we feel with others around us. That connectedness often brings a sense of safety and belonging within a community.?

Fairness?means we perceive justice in decisions that are made, and that interactions are generally unbiased and conducted in accordance with shared standards.?

When any of these areas are threatened – or if we simply?perceive?a threat – our brain responds just like it would if it thought we might die. It floods our system with cortisol (the “stress hormone”) and also cuts down on the amount of glucose and oxygen available for cognitive reasoning.?

Taken together, that means we can’t think very well when we think our social status is under attack.?

And keep in mind that you don’t have to?actually?be trying to take away my choices or steal my spot in the pecking order for me to respond this way. Any time my brain convinces itself something SCARF-y is going on, it’s getting stingy with the oxygen and opening the cortisol floodgates.?

Now, let’s imagine I’m a marketing leader, and I know my departmental structure has gotten out of whack. We have too many silos, too many handoffs, and too few pieces of valuable work getting done.?

Clearly, it’s time for a change. Cross-functional teams are way better than silos (I know this because I’m an agilist and I’ve done all the courses and read all the books), so I decide that’s how we’ll restructure.?

By announcing such a shift – even though I have a really good reason and feel highly confident this is the right thing for us to do as a department – I have now almost certainly triggered a whole avalanche of SCARF-related reactions in my teams.?

• Everybody’s sense of?certainty?is threatened, because they thought they were on one team and now they’re on a totally different one.?
• Relatedness?is under attack, because the relationships they forged have been rearranged in all kinds of ways.?
• Reporting structures got realigned, which means anybody who had title- or role-based authority feels like their?status?is in jeopardy.
• Depending on how I communicated this change, and to what extent I involved others in my decision-making processes, both?fairness?and?autonomy?could also be on this list.?

And remember, once these responses get triggered, people aren’t thinking clearly.?

They’re moving in slow motion through a thick sea of cortisol, with little oxygen and glucose to power their higher-level cognitive functions.?

So here I go, gleefully swinging my machete and forging a new path off our collective trail, while everybody else is overwhelmed by the flight, fight, or freeze signals from their threatened brains.

To counteract these reactions, groundwork and preparation are crucial. Prior to any off-the-trail efforts, we need to work to shore up the various pieces of our SCARF. Patch holes, repair tears, get rid of that weird dangly string that makes your cat attack you whenever you wear it.?

The best time to take these steps is now. Reinforce the connections among people and teams. Ensure people’s voices are heard during planning phases. Draft clear, concise communications that lay out the impact of structural and reporting changes. Allow for choice whenever it’s feasible.?

Restructuring, reorganization, or transformation may feel far away to you, but understanding the SCARF model and taking steps to strategically strengthen your teams is one of the best things you can do, even if you don’t ever leave the beaten path.?

And if major change IS on your horizon, it’s time to give serious attention to the condition of your SCARF.?

Stay toasty,?

Andrea