Thought Leadership

Resolving the Resolution Riddle: Behavioral Science Insights for Achieving Sustainable Change

January 15, 2025
Author: Rob Darrow

Now that the New Year is upon us, it is once again that time when many of us are sobered by the extra pounds we put on during our holiday feasting. This is often accompanied by the disturbing realization that our exercise routines are less than ideal. Predictably, each and every January, thousands of us respond by setting diet, exercise, and weight goals and immediately adopting radical new regimens with determination and enthusiasm.

Just as reliable is what happens next. The second Friday in January is known as “Quitter’s Day” because many, if not most of us, have decided by that date that we can’t follow through on our resolutions and we throw in the towel.

So, what should we make of all of this? Are resolutions just a waste of time? Are there any lessons to be learned about us as human beings and as consumers? What insights can organizations learn about goal setting and sustainable behavior change and how might firms apply these lessons from behavioral science to better understand and serve their clients?

First, it’s important to understand that our urge to examine ourselves at the beginning of the year is a natural phenomenon. For many of us, the beginning of the calendar year symbolizes new beginnings and an opportunity for a fresh start. This urge to reflect and boost energy to change is so common that it has been studied and goes by the name of the “fresh start effect”: a behavioral science insight into how people are more motivated to pursue goals or make changes following temporal landmarks, such as a new year. Some of us are driven by aspirational goals (e.g., “I’m finally going to drop those 30 pounds and get back to the shape I was in during college) while others of us are concerned about meeting our responsibilities and/or avoiding risk or loss (e.g., I’ve got to drop those 30 pounds to lower my blood pressure and make sure I’m around to see my grandchildren).

Behavioral science principles divides these “motivational mindsets” into two categories. The aspirational, gain-driven mindset is referred to as “promotion focus,” while the protective, loss-avoidant mindset is known as “prevention focus.” As this example shows, it’s possible that two individuals may share the same goal (i.e., losing 30 pounds), but the framing and focus of the motivation behind the goal may be quite different (i.e., getting back to college shape vs. avoiding a heart attack). In turn, a firm trying to market its products/services (e.g., gym membership) to these individuals needs to recognize that there are different ways to frame benefits to different customers, and each may require a different marketing and messaging strategies to resonate with different segments.

Of course, goals are one thing, while actual behavior is another. Understanding that there is often a significant discrepancy between our intentions and our actual behaviors, behavioral scientists refer to this phenomenon as the “intention-behavior gap.”

There is no single reason for this gap between what many of us intend to do versus what we actually carry out. In fact, there are many issues that can contribute to this problem because behavior change is hard and the factors that prevent meaningful change can vary depending on the individual involved.

For purposes of this blog post, I am only going to focus on a couple of key issues that are often important factors of behavior science: the desire for immediate results and a haphazard approach to goal setting.

Seeking immediate results is an understandable human instinct, but this sense of urgency sometimes causes us to jump headfirst into tackling concerns or aspirations, figuring that some action is better than none. Using our diet and exercise example, we often draw upon our limited knowledge of familiar exercises and popular diets as a way to act. But in doing so, we often don’t do the research or necessary prep work to ensure we achieve a reasonable outcome. In short:

  • We set unrealistic goals for ourselves
  • We choose exercises that aren’t optimal for meeting our health goals and follow harsh diets that leave us feeling deprived rather than healthy
  • We create routines that are overly ambitious, are not sustainable over the long run, and may even conflict with some of our other goals as we forget to take a holistic look at our life (e.g., a gym routine that conflicts with family time)

What is the all too familiar outcome of the above? We feel disappointed when our exercises and diets don’t pay dividends, we feel exhausted from all of the time invested in non-productive endeavors, and we feel discouraged when we don’t see evidence that we are making progress against our unrealistic goals. So, despite our best intentions, we as individuals become disillusioned under these circumstances and we quit our resolution/goal. Although our desired end goal may be appropriate, what is needed is a more thoughtful and reasonable approach to accomplishing our personal goals.

Organizations are not immune to these same challenges when they “resolve” to accomplish specific goals. When sales or market share decline or customer complaints increase, firms sometimes fall into the same trap of rushing to respond, doing so haphazardly and being disappointed in the results.

Rather than repeat the kind of mistakes we can make when setting personal goals, organizations would benefit by taking a more measured approach when facing a new problem and determining the goals to set in response.

  • Step One: Clearly define and agree on the problem (e.g., a consistent sales decline) as well as a corresponding goal to achieve (e.g., to restore sales to previous levels over the coming year).
  • Step Two: Conduct research both internally and externally to identify the key contributors to the problem at hand. Too often firms think they “know” the root cause of their problem without doing the necessary research. For example, a new competitive product might be blamed for depressed sales, when in reality, customer tastes may have changed, product quality may have dropped, and messaging may not be resonating. Don’t guess. Research.
  • Step Three: Determine what actions might be effective in addressing these issues, what impact these actions could have, and what resources would be required. In this way, firms can determine which actions seem most viable. Our Strategic Consulting Services group leverages validated behavioral science frameworks to synthesize factors, structure workshops, and generate actionable recommendations to transform your insights into meaningful outcomes.

At this point, research may once again be needed to validate the proposed actions and identify those that deserve to be prioritized. In addition, if a marketing campaign is being considered, research will also help determine whether a “promotion” or “prevention” marketing approach would have greatest impact for different target audiences.

By taking this more considered and analytical approach to goal setting, organizations can increase the odds of successfully achieving their objectives. In this way, organizations can not only resolve to act but also ensure that the actions they take are the right ones and have the desired impact.

When it comes to addressing this goal-setting process, Escalent stands ready to be your partner throughout. Whether it’s identifying key problems and their contributing factors, evaluating potential responses, or determining the most effective communication strategies, we welcome a chance to help you meet and exceed your corporate goals.

Special thanks to Escalent’s BeSci expert, Allie Dautrich, for her contributions to this blog post!

 


Want to learn more? Let’s connect.



 

Rob Darrow
Rob Darrow
Senior Director, Qualitative

Rob is a seasoned qualitative research and marketing professional with over 30 years of experience in qualitative research, product marketing, and product management. Rob has served a variety of clients in banking, wealth management, and health insurance including Bank of America, BlackRock, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Capital Group, Franklin Templeton, Merrill, Quicken Loans, United Healthcare, Vanguard, and Wells Fargo. Among other targets, he has worked with financial services executives, advisors, small business owners, health insurance professionals, and consumers. Prior to joining Escalent, Rob held research positions at Ipsos UU and King Brown Partners. In addition to his research background, Rob has 16+ years of experience in the tech industry, and held senior Marketing roles in both Fortune 1000 corporations and start-up firms including Motorola Computer Systems, Plantronics, Pixo, and Vocera.  Rob received a BA from Stanford University and an MBA from UCLA Anderson School of Management, and he is a RIVA trained moderator.