The Top-Down Reflex

This article is part of the series on behavioral design and the DUDUR method .
You can find explanations of the common concepts here: Concepts in the DUDUR method .

Changes almost always start from the top – and are expected to trickle down to those who are hands-on in practice.

Management formulates values, visions and slogans that are intended to set direction and create commitment – and expects it to move down through the organization and into reality.

It is a reflex that stems from classical organizational logic: you lead through structures, messages and plans.
But in practice, the reflex is often coupled with the old thought:
“If only they knew, they would do the right thing.”

I call that premise the Knowledge-Behavior Illusion – the belief that knowledge automatically leads to action.
When the top-down reflex builds on that illusion, we get a double problem:

First, leaders must understand, want – and do it.
They are then expected to have the time, ability and desire to communicate it further so that employees also understand, want and do it.

It's a bit like betting on paying the rent by winning the lottery – two months in a row.

Communication is itself behavioral design

Communication is not neutral – it is itself a form of behavioral design.
It should create movement, remove friction and get someone to do something.

But it only works if it hits what's actually bothering you.
If you haven't first talked to those who need to act and understood what friction is standing in the way, you risk using communication as a placebo: something that feels right to do but doesn't change behavior.

The example: Welfare technology

A typical example is the rollout of welfare technology.
The management or city council decides that citizens will need to use more welfare technology in the future – to free up time, save resources and increase self-reliance.

Communication and presentations are made and sent to managers, who then have to get their employees to change practices.

But far too rarely do we ask those who are actually going to make it happen: the employees who meet citizens every day.

A nationwide survey shows that only 34% of municipal leaders assess that frontline employees are largely involved when new welfare technology is implemented.
This means that two-thirds of decisions to change practices are made without real contact with those who do the work.

When professional opinion turns into friction

When you finally ask the employees, a different picture emerges.
The friction rarely lies in the technology – but in the meaning.

As an article on Knowledge Across formulated it in “Welfare Technology: We must always think professionalism before gadgets” ( https://vpt.dk/hjemmepleje/velfaerdsteknologi-vi-skal-altid-taenke-faglighed-foer-dims ):

“Nurses are traditionally not motivated by technology. They are motivated by relationships – by providing professional care and concern.”

For many, technology is not experienced as a help, but as a loss:

“It feels like technology is taking something away from us – the closeness and care that gives work meaning.”
(see the report A professional perspective on welfare technology in day and residential care at https://vpt.dk/sites/default/files/2022-08/Rapport%20fremf%C3%A6rd_s%C3%A6rlige%20behov_4K.pdf ).

FOA's own studies point to the same thing:

“Employees experience that technology reduces their role from being caring relational practitioners to becoming technology users – and that it undermines professionalism.”
(see also the article “Technology should not control us – but strengthen us” at https://vpt.dk/hjemmepleje/teknologien-skal-ikke-styre-os-men-styrke-os ).

When viewed through behavioral design glasses, the point becomes clear:
It is not about resistance to change, but about a conflict between professional motivation and friction of opinion.

Employees want to do the right thing – it's the Will-Will reflex.
But if the behavior feels like giving up what gives value to the work, friction arises that neither training nor communication can overcome.

Two layers of friction

When we communicate from the top down, we rarely hit the spot where the action needs to happen.

The result is two layers of friction:

• With managers, who may perceive the rollout as a lower priority because their focus is shift schedules, operations, and firefighting.
• On the front lines, who may feel that technology is displacing what gives work meaning: care and human contact.

When communicating through both layers, the message loses both energy and relevance long before it reaches those who actually need to act.

Start in reality – not in PowerPoint

If you want behavior, you have to start in practice – where the work actually happens.
That's the difference between Work-As-Imagined and Work-As-Done :
between the reality we believe exists and the reality that actually exists.

Safety-II thinking reminds us that people make things work every day – not in spite of the system, but because of the adjustments they make in practice.

Therefore, change should not be designed for the world we imagine, but for the one people find themselves in.

Talk to those who need to act before deciding what to do.

Examine the situation, behavior, and friction before designing the solution – that’s the SAFL mindset in practice:

• Situation – What is actually happening in everyday life?
• Behavior – What are people already doing?
• Friction – What is standing in the way of them being able to do what they really want?
• Solution – What can remove the friction so that the action becomes natural?

When we start where the work actually happens, we can design communication and change that support the Will-Will reflex instead of thwarting it.

Read more

• The will-to-like reflex – why people actually want to do the right thing ( https://elearningspecialist.com/blog/posts/2025/november/vil-gerne-reflesen/ )
• The Longest Path to Behavior – Why Learning Rarely Creates Action ( https://elearningspecialist.com/blog/posts/2025/november/laeringens-laengste-vej/ )
• Safety-II and Work-As-Done – when security makes reality visible ( https://elearningspecialist.com/blog/posts/2025/november/safety-ii-work-as-done/ )
• Concepts in the DUDUR method – overview of the models behind the articles ( https://elearningspecialist.com/blog/posts/2025/november/begreber-dudur-metoden/ )

Did you like what you read?

If you think this made sense, you'll probably also want to follow my next project:
I am currently writing volume 2 in the series Superlearning? – the book From Learning Theater to Behavior.

It is about how we can use the DUDUR method to design learning and communication that actually changes behavior.
The book builds on The DNA of Learning – where I show how learning happens in the brain and how we can remove the bottlenecks that stand in the way of understanding, engagement and memory.

👉 If you want to be notified when From Learning Theatre to Behavior is published – and follow the work along the way, you can sign up here:
Keep me updated

You can also read more about the series at superlaering.dk