In the fast-moving, disruption-heavy environment most of us are currently experiencing, organizational change is rarely linear. Even the best strategies often look like two steps forward, one step back—or sometimes, one step forward, two steps back. This is the essence of two-step leadership: the dance between progress and regression, innovation and preservation. Understanding the biological and behavioral forces behind this pattern can help leaders navigate transformation with more insight, resilience, and ultimately, success. As I’ve explored in a previous Forbes article on the biology of behavior, sustainable progress requires more than bold ideas. It demands attunement to how humans—and human systems—actually respond to change.
The Science Behind Two-Step Leadership
At its core, two-step leadership isn’t a flaw in execution—it’s a feature of how systems evolve. From a biological perspective, any system under stress defaults to homeostasis—a return to the familiar, even if the familiar is no longer effective. This happens in the human body, in social groups, and in organizations. Leaders who fail to anticipate these regressions often misread them as failure, when they may simply be the body politic—or the organizational “nervous system”—seeking regulation.
This dynamic reflects what neuroscientists call allostatic regulation: the body’s way of achieving stability through change. When demands on the system exceed its perceived capacity, it pulls back into safer, more predictable behaviors. The same holds true for teams. Change doesn’t fail because it’s a bad idea—it fails because the system hasn’t yet adapted.
Two-Step Leadership Requires Precision
Much like managing blood sugar or cortisol levels, effective change leadership involves pacing. Leaders who create too much novelty too quickly trigger resistance. This is why major transformation efforts so often stall after an initial surge of energy. The challenge isn’t starting the change—it’s sustaining it long enough for it to become normalized.
Much like managing blood sugar or cortisol levels, effective change leadership involves pacing. Leaders who create too much novelty too quickly often trigger resistance. This is why major transformation efforts so often stall after an initial surge of energy. The challenge isn’t starting the change—it’s sustaining it long enough for it to become normalized.
This is where two-step leadership shines. It anticipates the backlash. It builds in the regressions. It sees temporary retreats not as breakdowns, but as feedback loops. Research by McKinsey & Company on transformation efforts found that 70% of large-scale change initiatives fail, often due to an underestimation of emotional resistance. Two-step leadership recognizes this: what looks like a step back may actually be the system catching its breath—reorganizing itself to support what’s next.
Two-Step Leadership in Action
We’ve seen versions of this across sectors. A company launches a new diversity initiative, only to face quiet cultural resistance. A tech firm adopts agile methods, but the old hierarchy creeps back in. A government agency moves toward digitization, only to find workers reverting to paper processes. These aren’t failures of strategy—they’re natural expressions of behavioral inertia.
An example comes from on the neuroscience of conversations. It explores how the brain constantly scans for cues of safety or threat in every interaction, particularly in meetings. When people perceive ambiguity or exclusion, their nervous systems trigger defensive states, narrowing their ability to engage or innovate. Two-step leadership works the same way—it’s not just about strategy or culture. It’s about understanding the neurobiological reality of how people adapt, resist, and eventually internalize change. The most effective leaders design change efforts that speak directly to how the brain metabolizes uncertainty.
Building Cadence Into the Culture
The key question becomes: how do we shift the cadence from one forward, two back… to two forward, one back? That’s a rhythm worth aiming for—and one that requires cultural conditioning. Organizations can train their systems to tolerate more ambiguity, metabolize more change, and rebound more quickly.
A few strategies that reinforce this cadence:
- Normalize regression. Treat steps back as part of the plan, not a deviation from it.
- Build emotional redundancy. Just like mechanical redundancy prevents failure, emotional backup systems (like team rituals or purpose anchors) can regulate stress in moments of backslide.
- Use language carefully. Frame setbacks as recalibrations, not reversals. Language shapes biology.
In Daniel Kahneman’s work on cognitive bias, he reminds us that our brains are wired to overreact to losses. Two-step leadership involves reframing those losses as loops, not cliffs.
In the end, two-step leadership isn’t about eliminating setbacks—it’s about designing with them in mind. Just as biological systems learn, adapt, and evolve in cycles, so do organizations. The dance between preservation and progress is ancient, but the leaders who understand its rhythm can shift the sequence. They can guide their teams from reactive spirals to adaptive spirals. And over time, that’s how two steps forward—even with one step back—becomes the new normal.