The want-to reflex: why people actually want to do the right thing

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

People fundamentally want to do the right thing if the conditions are there.

I call it the want-to reflex.

Yet, lack of action is too often explained by a lack of motivation or knowledge – as if people don't want to, or don't know how.
But most people want to. They are just held back by friction – practical, psychological or social barriers that make it difficult, unsafe or pointless to act.

When we remove the friction, the behavior arises by itself.

When we talk about friction, it is not about resistance for the sake of resistance, but about the conditions that determine whether will can become action.
Friction manifests itself in four basic forms – and together they explain why people who actually want to do the right thing sometimes don't.

The four types of friction are:

1. Safety friction – when we don't dare.
2. Meaning friction – when we can't see why.
3. Ability friction – when we don't feel we can.
4. Effort friction – when it doesn't feel worth the effort.

Let's take a closer look at them one by one.

1. Safety – “I dare”

Even when people want to, many hold back because they don't dare.
They fear making a fool of themselves, causing trouble, or being seen as someone who is “doing it wrong.”

Behavior requires psychological safety – a space where you can act without being hit over the head for it afterwards.

The theory behind:
Amy Edmondson has shown that psychological safety is a prerequisite for learning and innovation.
When we fear mistakes, we learn nothing. When we dare to act, we learn everything.

Design levers:

• Use appreciative language (“it’s good you asked” rather than “you should know”).
• Create examples where people can practice in a safe environment.
• Make action socially legitimate: “We call those on sick leave on day 1 – it’s care, not control.”

2. Meaning – “I can see why”

People act when they understand the meaning behind the action – not just because someone has told them to.
Therefore, rules and policies rarely work when they only explain what to do without telling why .

We need to be able to see that it is connected to something that we ourselves think makes sense – our values, professionalism or everyday life.

The theory behind:
Self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan) shows that motivation grows when three needs are met:

• Self-determination – I choose it myself.
• Competence – I can figure it out.
• Belonging – I do it for someone I care about.

Design levers:

• Start with why – not how .
• Show how it helps me , not just “us as an organization.”
• Cut out abstract management rhetoric – no one learns from “visions” and “strategic goals”.

3. Ability, reminder and situation – “I can (and am reminded of it)”

When we ask people why something doesn't happen, most people point to this:
They say they can't, that they lack time, resources or practical opportunities.
This is also where most organizations start – by providing more tools, instructions, and training.

And yes, sometimes it's real.
But just as often, the statement “we don't have time” or “we can't” covers up something else.
As Daniel Kahneman describes it, we use a substitution:
When faced with a complex question (“why isn’t the behavior happening?”), we unconsciously answer with an easier one (“do we have the time and resources?”).

This means that an alleged ability friction often hides another:
Perhaps there is a lack of safety, meaning – or the feeling that it is even worth the effort.

At the same time, ability is not just about knowledge or technical skills, but about being able to act in the situation.
John Seely Brown described it as situated learning – learning and action occur in practice, not in advance ( https://infed.org/mobi/situated-learning-and-community-of-practice/ ).
Knowledge only becomes useful when it is linked to the specific context in which it is to be used.

An employee may well have understood what needs to be done, but still find themselves in a context where it does not feel possible – or where the signals from the environment pull in a different direction.

And this is where cues and context come in.
We need to build actions that support people where they stand and remind them of that in the moment when the behavior needs to happen.

The theory behind:

• BJ Fogg (Stanford): Behavior = Motivation × Ability × Cue. If one factor is missing, nothing happens.
• John Seely Brown: Situated learning – learning and action occur in practice, not in advance.
• Daniel Kahneman: Substitution – people answer complex questions with simpler ones without realizing it ( Thinking, Fast and Slow ).

Design levers:

• Examine the context before designing the solution – what is happening where the behavior needs to happen?
• Build cues and support into the situation itself, not afterwards.
• See the statement “we don’t have time” as a symptom – not necessarily the cause.
• Remove emotional barriers first: make the action safe, meaningful and realistic.

Remember:
Friction is often just a feeling.

It cannot always be seen, measured or explained – but it can be felt.

And it is precisely that feeling that most often holds people back from doing what they really want to do.

4. Effort, time and barter – “It has to be worth it”

Even when something feels safe, makes sense and is possible, we don't do it if it doesn't feel worth the time.
We pay with time every time we act, and we make small mental trade-offs:

“Is this worth spending 10 minutes on – right now?”

This doesn't mean that people are lazy – they are realistic.

The theory behind:
Behavioral economics calls it effort discounting – the more effort something requires, the less attractive it becomes.

Kahneman & Tversky described how we overestimate the cost of effort.

Mullainathan & Shafir showed in Scarcity how time scarcity creates “mental tunnels” where only the urgent feels important.

Dan Ariely calls it effort aversion – we avoid actions that feel like work unless the payoff is clear and imminent.

Design levers:

• Make the gain concrete and close to the present.
• Cut time and steps – “two clicks and done.”
• Combine the action with something people already do (“When I log in, I also check…”).
• Acknowledge the effort: “We know you’re busy – that’s why we’ve made it easy.”

The four types of friction combined

Read more

• Concepts in the DUDUR method – introduction to the central ideas and friction types ( https://elearningspecialist.com/en/blog/dudur-method-concepts/ )
• The Longest Path to Behavior – Why Learning Rarely Creates Action ( https://elearningspecialist.com/en/blog/behavior-design/ )
• The top-down reflex – when change starts in the wrong place ( https://elearningspecialist.com/en/blog/the-top-down-reflex-when-change-starts-in-the-wrong-place/ )
• Psychological safety – the hidden prerequisite of behavior ( https://elearningspecialist.com/blog/psykologisk-tryghed/, in Danish )

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.

Volume 2, From Learning Theatre to Behavior, is about this. It is not finished yet, but the first chapter is on frictiontheory.org (in Danish), and if you sign up below you will hear when it is.

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