To Improve the Assignee Experience Keep the Brain in Mind

About eight year's ago an Amazon algorithm analyzed my purchase history and recommended a book on the neuroscience. More specifically, Spark by John Ratey, was about how exercise benefits the brain. I had never considered reading a book on the brain before, but the description and reviews were convincing, so I clicked "purchase." 

Spark was a terrific book. Thanks to Dr. Ratey's enthusiasm for his subject matter and Amazon's artificial intelligence, I was off and running in my exploration of the latest in neuroscience. While I continue to read novels, a good habit, as well as books on business, nutrition, and other topics, in the months and years since I encountered Spark, I have returned to books on the brain more than any other subject. I am 20 books in. I'm actually starting number 21, Unbroken Brain, by Maia Szalavitz, today.

The more I read, the more I found that Neuroscience sheds light on the underlying, often unconscious, causes of behaviors, both in myself, and in others.

Reading about the brain has provided me with practical, applicable insights into my behavior, my habits, and my relationships with others. Developing an understanding of how the brain works is like learning the basics of our operating system. The more I read, the more I find that Neuroscience sheds light on the underlying, often unconscious, causes of behaviors both in myself and in others. Choices that had puzzled me start to make sense. Even better, improved understanding inevitably points to valid alternatives. 

As I read about the brain, particularly social neuroscience, it is natural to consider potential applications in the world of relocation. What can findings in neuroscience teach us about the assignee experience, and as a result, what changes might we make to be more effective as service providers and HR professionals who work in service of those assignees?

In all my reading, one model of brain function in stood out as having practical applications in the world of relocation. In 2008's Your Brain at Work, author and executive coach Dr. David Rock introduce's the SCARF model, which focuses on five domains of social interaction to which the brain is particularly responsive. 

The human brain has extensive wiring dedicated to social interaction. The thinking is that these robust neural networks for understanding others developed for survival reasons. For our hunter-gatherer ancestors, getting along with peers was critical to survival. Being "out" of the group could mean isolation and almost certain death. In fact, brain imaging shows that social pain, while it may seem minor from a removed, rational perspective, can trigger life-or-death level alarm responses in the brain. The hunter/gatherer wiring that perceives social threats as critical to survival remains a part of our circuitry. While, the stakes may not be quite as high in the modern world, it is still true that the rewards which mean the most to us--a pat on the back, a hug after a hard day, a promotion, a raise, a listening ear, a gift, acceptance, forgiveness--come from other people. Meeting our needs successfully requires understanding others, thus our extensive brain networks for social interaction.  

Dr. Rock's model points to research showing that the brain is particularly attuned to potential rewards or threats in five social domains: Status, Certainty, Autonomy, Relatedness and Fairness--SCARF. Too much threat or reward in these areas activates our emotional centers essentially taking the prefrontal cortex offline. This tendency is significant because the prefrontal cortex is the center for most of our higher order thinking and, therefore, the brain region that most decision-making, problem-solving managers are paid to engage.

Ever sit at your desk, unable to work as you mull over the critical remarks a colleague directed at your project during a meeting? Status threat. Ever find it difficult to focus on the task at hand in the hours leading up to an important performance review? Status and Certainty threats. Ever have a colleague plant herself in your office and vent for hours because a younger, less qualified peer was just given a promotion she had her heart set on? Fairness threat. In the statement, "I just can't work right now because I'm too bothered by _________" the blank space is likely to be filled in with an issue that threatens to our sense of Status, Certainty, Autonomy, Relatedness or Fairness. 

Once you see how Dr. Rock's model applies to our personal experience, it does not take a great leap of imagination to understand how these same threats to Status, Certainty, Autonomy, Relatedness and Fairness, are bound to be activated during relocation. Will I get along with my new team? Status and Certainty. Will my spouse find work in the new location? Certainty. Why do I have to move anyway? Autonomy and Fairness. Who will my new friends be? Relatedness and Certainty. Will my kids hate me for taking them away from their friends? Relatedness, Certainty and Fairness. Why does the company get to decide how much I spend on rent and why is it less than what Jane got? Autonomy and Fairness. Why do I only get 30 days in temporary accommodation? Autonomy and Fairness.

We could play this game for hours, scrolling through the list of potential SCARF related threats that an assignee is likely to encounter during a relocation. Compounding the stress is the fact that it is not only the assignee who is subject to these threats and the related disturbance to the ability to think and function at a high level. Spouses, partners, children (especially teens) are all subject to the same emotional derailment over a period of several months as they navigate the challenges of an international move. 

This model shows us that the assignee who "loses it" when we call to inform him that his request for a rental allowance increase has been rejected is not simply exhibiting poor self-control. Such news decreases the assignee's certainty about finding suitable housing, highlights his lack of autonomy in determining the allowance in the first place, and if his claim was reasonable, feels just plain unfair. Suddenly, the assignee is receiving an alarm signal from deep in his brain telling him over and over again, "Something's wrong! Something's wrong! Something's wrong!" This signal is more likely to trigger an outburst if the bad news is delivered at the end of a challenging workday. Or if it is the third relocation related setback that week. Or if he just got off the phone with his teenage daughter who called to explain how this move is ruining her entire life. 

At the least, the SCARF model provides a scientific basis for empathy

Even those of us with the most exemplary self-control have our limits. Understanding Dr. Rock's SCARF model can help us to appreciate just how arduous the experience of relocation can be for an assignee. At the least, this model provides a scientific basis for the empathy required to be a successful relocation professional. This fact-based argument for empathy alone makes it worthwhile to understand SCARF, but there are more potential applications for those of us who support assignees for a living.

One might argue that a company making the significant investment required to move an exceptional manager to a different continent is actually moving that manager's prefrontal cortex. I know that this is an odd suggestion, but please stay with me. What is a quality manager if not a strategic-thinking, decision-making, problem-solving, relationship-managing machine? The core abilities that make a manager exceptional reside, predominantly, in that thin layer of grey matter at the front of our brains--the prefrontal cortex. Yet, exactly when that manager needs to those abilities most, as she adjusts to the challenges of leading a new team on a new project in a new country with a unique culture, her prefrontal cortex is likely to be offline at regular intervals. These distracting down times are a challenge throughout the relocation process--returning intermittently, or frequently, from the day an offer letter arrives until several months after the assignee and her family have "settled" into life in her new destination. 

Any company sending staff on international assignments can assume that they are losing countless hours of focused productive work from assignees who are simply offline because they feel they are not being treated fairly, or because they are not sure how their family will adjust to the relocation, or because they are distracted by uncertainty about what life will be like in the new destination, or because they feel isolated in a new country. That is just the way the brain works. 

We are obliged to ask... Can we do better? 

It is a mistake to brush these facts aside, telling ourselves that moving is stressful and there's not much that can be done about it, or that we will make the effort to choose candidates who are better suited to manage the stress of relocation. Also, employers cannot afford to make the indifferent assumption that career benefits and cultural opportunities offset the demands of an international move. The stakes, both financial and strategic, are too high. Companies truly committed to maintaining an international presence are bound to pay a high price if they dismiss the difficulties they are asking an employee to face when sent on assignment. Yes, there is no getting around the fact that a long-distance relocation is inherently stressful; and true, some individuals are better suited to deal with that stress than others. Still, when we come to understand just how real the social stresses that accompany relocation are, we are obliged to ask ourselves a simple question: Can we do better? 

Dr. Rock's model provides a powerful framework for having just such a conversation. If we know that the brain responds strongly to these social threats, how might we adjust our policies and improve our procedures so as to reduce them during relocation? How can we decrease an assignee's sense of uncertainty as he makes the transition? What small changes might we implement to increase an assignee's sense that she is being treated fairly? How can we increase the sense of relatedness for the assignee and his family throughout the process, and especially in those critical few months after arrival? Though the approach deserves much more space than is suitable for this already long post, the basics are simple: review our role in the relocation process asking foundational questions along the way--questions such as, "At this point, is our assignee feeling threatened or rewarded in the domains of SCARF?" and, "How might we do better?" Any exercise that holds our policies and procedures up against the SCARF model is bound to point to opportunities for improvement.

Two well-documented trends, increasing international relocation and a shrinking talent pool, are aligning such that companies intent on competing in the global marketplace will benefit greatly from making mobility a key element of their overall business strategy. In the face of these trends, employers who make an authentic effort to support and improve assignee and family adjustment during international relocation are well positioned to realize a distinct competitive advantage. If talent truly is in short supply, then taking care of talent makes good business sense. Clearly, there is work to be done. Dr. Rock's model provides a simple, practical and powerful model for doing that work. 

Read more about Dr. David Rock's SCARF model here. Learn about his organization, the NeuroLeadership Institute, here. And don't forget his book, Your Brain at Work.

Do you have work or relocation related experience that makes more sense in light of this model? Have you read a good book about the brain? Perhaps you think I've overstated the challenges of relocation? Please share a comment.