An examination of behavioural psychology and performance ...

From Comfort Zone to Performance Management
Alasdair White











From Comfort Zone to Performance Management

Understanding development and performance

Alasdair White


























Alasdair White hereby asserts and gives notice of his right under s.77 of the Copyright, Designs & Patents Act
1988 to be identified as the author of the article entitled From Comfort Zone to Performance Management.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works
3.0 Unported License.
To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/ or
send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco,
California, 94105, USA

Attribution: © Alasdair White 2008
Short extracts, if properly cited and referenced, may be used for the purposes of criticism, review or academic
research, under fair usage rules. The document in part or as a whole may be freely copied and distributed provided
all such usage is correctly attributed.

Email: alasdair.white@pm-solutions.com
Web: www.pm-solutions.com



April 2008

1 of 17

---

From Comfort Zone to Performance Management
Alasdair White



From Comfort Zone to Performance Management

Understanding development and performance

Introduction

This paper seeks to take the established behavioural models relating to comfort zones,
group and individual development, and managing change and use them to create a
methodology for understanding and managing performance. It seeks to provide a
reliable approach to getting the best out of people that is firmly based on sound
behavioural and psychological principles backed up by observational data and
practical field research. It is not, however, a ‘scientific’ paper full of detailed research
data, complex theories, and high-flown rhetoric, but rather it is a practical guide based
on twenty years of consultancy in the field and eight years of teaching university
students in a business school.

In understanding and managing performance, the key is the management of the stress.
Both motivation and anxiety are, behaviourally, sub-sets of stress and, consequently,
they are tools to assist in performance management – there will be times when
motivation will be the most useful tool, while at others the introduction of anxiety will
be more appropriate. However, too much motivation or anxiety will result in too
much stress and this will result in performance being disabled.

The correct management style needs to be applied in each phase if performance is to
be maximised. Applying the incorrect style has a negative impact on performance. In
situations in which a series of performance-enhancing steps need to be taken, it is
imperative to start the new performance cycle at the point at which the old
performance cycle develops a slowing performance trend.

In Section I, the author reviews the principle working models. This is followed in
Section II by the development of the TPR Life-cycle Model – a composite working
model that can be used to understand and manage performance, development, and
change.


Section I
Page 3
Section II
Page 10
Bibliography
Page 16
Biography of the author
Page 17




April 2008

2 of 17

---

From Comfort Zone to Performance Management
Alasdair White




Section I – the working models

The Comfort Zone

The origin of the phrase ‘comfort zone’ is very hard to track down and everyone has a
personal definition and understanding of the term. The earliest usage in relation to
performance is in the title of Judith Bardwick’s 1991 work ‘Danger in the Comfort
Zone: From Boardroom to Mailroom – How to Break the Entitlement Habit that’s
Killing American Business’1 but, although the book explores performance and
behaviour, the author does not even use the term ‘comfort zone’, let alone define it.

Expressions such as ‘being in one’s comfort zone’ or ‘I’m comfortable with that’
exemplify the extent to which the concept has become accepted in the English
language. Psychologists and behaviourists have their own meaning of the term but
when it comes to performance, it is relatively straightforward to construct a definition
that encapsulates the principle elements:

The comfort zone is a behavioural state within which a person operates
in an anxiety-neutral condition, using a limited set of behaviours to
deliver a steady level of performance, usually without a sense of risk.

This implies that, providing there is no change in the ‘anxiety’ or the skills applied,
the level of performance will remain constant. Equally, if there is a change in the
‘anxiety’ or the skills applied then a change in the level of performance will result –
either upwards or downwards.

Yerkes and Dodson2 were the first to investigate the impact of ‘anxiety’ on
performance in their ground breaking 1907 experiment with mice in which, as quoted
in Bardwick (op. cit.), they found that “Anxiety improves performance until a certain
optimum level of arousal has been reached. Beyond that point, performance
deteriorates as higher levels of anxiety are attained.” This result points directly to the
conclusion that increasing the anxiety will boost performance and that too much
anxiety will decrease performance but that either case will cause the subject to move
out of their comfort zone. McCelland, Atkinson and others3, when researching into
motivation in 1953, found a similar correlation between performance and motivation
and their findings, as quoted in Barwick (op. cit.), were that “…motivation to achieve
and level of effort keep rising until expectancy of success (or level of uncertainty of
success) reaches 50%. Then, even though the expectancy continues to increase,
motivation falls.” The question here is whether motivation and anxiety have extensive
commonality – this question will be addressed in Section II.


1 Bardwick, J. – Danger in the Comfort Zone: From Boardroom to Mailroom – How to Break the
Entitlement Habit that’s Killing American Business, 1991, American Management Association
2 Yerkes, R., & Dodson, J. – ‘The Dancing Mouse, A Study in Animal Behavior’, 1907, Journal of
Comparative Neurology & Psychology, Number 18, pp. 459-482
3 McClelland, D.C., Atkinson, J.W., Clark, R.A., & Lowell, E.L. (1953) – The achievement motive,
1953, Princeton: Van Nostrand.



April 2008

3 of 17

---

From Comfort Zone to Performance Management
Alasdair White



Carnall supports this in his 1995 work on managing change4, in which he establishes a
direct correlation between how people feel about themselves (self-esteem) and their
performance. When this is compared to the stress they are under – a term Carnall uses
interchangeably with anxiety as used by Yerkes & Dodson – he too found that
performance increases with stress until a certain level is achieved, after which, as
stress increases, so performance decreases until it reaches a level at which behaviour
may become volatile and performance can go into free fall.

Since a performance-boosting increase in anxiety is, in performance management
terms, a good thing, we can define this state of arousal as being the ‘optimal
performance zone’, while we would define a level of anxiety that causes deterioration
in performance as being a bad thing or a ‘danger zone’. From this we can develop the
simple model illustrated in Figure 1 in which the off-set positioning is to indicate that,
in some areas of behaviour in a comfort zone, a small increase in anxiety can tip the
subject into the danger zone, while in other areas there has to be a large increase in
anxiety before a deterioration of performance occurs.




Figure 1 – Comfort Zone Model

This representation of the comfort zone model is not new and similar models can be
found in a variety of locations – especially amongst materials that deal with team and
individual development.5 The general principles in each case remain the same – there
is a comfort zone surrounded by a discomfort zone and these are together surrounded
by a danger zone. In all cases, the objective is to push or lead the subject into the
optimal performance zone so that their skills are increased and they become
comfortable with the level of anxiety, thus enabling them to consistently deliver an
increased level of performance. In other words, holding the subject in the optimal
performance zone for a long enough period for them to reach a new and expanded
comfort zone.


4 Carnall, C. – Managing Change in Organizations, 1995, Prentice Hall
5 e.g. http://newsletter.rapportleadership.com/July2006/process.html (accessed 11 March 2008)



April 2008

4 of 17

---

From Comfort Zone to Performance Management
Alasdair White



The three phases involved in this process form a transition between one steady
performance state (comfort zone 1) through a performance phase to an enhanced
second steady performance state (comfort zone 2) as shown in Figure 2 below. These
phases are fully discussed in Section II of this paper.



Figure 2 – Transition between Comfort Zones

Because, in the first performing phase, we are disturbing the steady state, we can
expect the initial performance to decline as the subject adjusts to the enhanced anxiety
levels, and then for performance to rise sharply. As the anxiety levels reach what
Yerkes and Dodson, as quoted in Bardwick (op. cit), called the “optimum level of
arousal” the performance enhancement will start to decelerate before settling back at a
new steady performance level. This performance follows what Charles Handy calls a
‘sigmoid curve’6 as shown in Figure 3.



Figure 3 – Transition between comfort zones showing the expected performance curve


6 Handy, C. – The Empty Raincoat, 1994, Hutchinson



April 2008

5 of 17

---

From Comfort Zone to Performance Management
Alasdair White



There is plenty of empirical evidence that this performance curve is a true reflection
of what happens – when first asked to do things differently, people need instruction in
the new process and, during the time they are learning, their performance will be
below the original performance. The reasons for this can be found in two other
models: Tuckman’s development theory and Carnall’s coping cycle.

Development theory

From a behavioural point of view the most useful starting point for development
theory is Bruce Tuckman’s 1965 work on group development7 in which he focused on
the stages from inception to performance and, originally, created a four-phase
sequence: forming, storming, norming and performing. His work focused on the
behaviours of team members as the group developed and these can be summarised as
in Table 1 below.

Forming
Unwilling to undertake the work and unable to do so.
Lack of knowledge and lack of skills. Tendency to
focus on themselves rather than the team.
Storming
Willing to attempt the work but still unable to do it as
the skills are missing. High conflict potential with
team members. Challenges ideas.
Norming
Unwillingness returns, possibly due to lack of self-
confidence in newly acquired skills, but they are able
to do the work. Focus tends to be on rules and
procedures, processes, and the ‘how’ of the work.
Performing Willing and able to do the work and to act as an
effective team. Focus changes to delivery of the
objectives.

Table 1 – Summation of behaviours in the Tuckman sequence

Over the years, various researchers8 have investigated and modified Tuckman’s
original model and in the mid 1970s Tuckman himself added a fifth phase which he
described as ‘adjourning’ in which the group disengages. Tuckman’s hypothesis has
stood the test of time as a suitable behavioural model for understanding group
development – to the extent that few practitioners involved in training in the
leadership or team-building field do not use it. What is particularly interesting,
though, is that few have seen the potential to apply the Tuckman sequence, with
suitably modified behavioural descriptors, to the development of individuals. This
absence led the author to establish a series of empirical observations to test the
hypothesis that the Tuckman sequence can be applied to the development of
individuals. The result of this was a behavioural grid that bears close comparison to
that which can be derived from the Tuckman sequence, and the conclusion is that a
similar sequence could be constructed for the development of individuals. However, a
second conclusion was also drawn: that a strict adherence to the Tuckman sequence
was not sustainable when performance (output), rather than process, was taken as the

7 Tuckman, Bruce W. – ‘Developmental Sequence in Small Groups’, 1965, Psychological Bulletin,
Volume 63, Number 6, pp. 384-99, American Psychological Association
8 e.g. Runkel, P. J., Lawrence M., Oldfield S., Rider, M., & Clark, C. – ‘Stages of group development
– an empirical test of Tuckman’s hypothesis’, 1971, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Number 7,
pp. 180-93



April 2008

6 of 17

---

From Comfort Zone to Performance Management
Alasdair White



dominant measure. In this case, some modification was seen as necessary which has
resulted in the development of a new model that will be discussed in Section II.


The coping cycle

Carnall’s coping cycle arises from his work on managing change in organizations in
which he observed that, when people are subjected to ‘change’, this has a significant
impact on their self-esteem.9 He further states that “linked to this impact on self-
esteem will be an impact on performance” (Carnall, 1995, op. cit.) and that rebuilding
self-esteem is essential to rebuilding performance after major change has taken place.
The author considers this finding significant since, in the first phase, we are disturbing
the steady state and thus causing change to occur.

Based on the work of de Vries and Miller (op. cit.) and Adams et al,10 (1976), Carnall
has constructed a five-phase coping cycle, as shown in Figure 4, from which
behavioural descriptors can be derived.




Figure 4 – The expected performance curve associated with the coping cycle
(Adapted from Carnall, 1995)

Stage 1: denial – as Carnall puts it “when significant changes are first mooted the
initial response may be to deny the need for change” (op. cit.). People suddenly find
that the current comfort zone is really ‘just what they are happy with’ and change
invokes fear and anxiety. A sudden increase in anxiety may well push people towards
the danger zone and this, instead of enhancing the performance, may well have a
detrimental effect. Carnall suggests that the initial response does not always cause an
immediate decline in performance but it does generate resistance. However,
eventually performance does decline well below previous levels.

9 Carnall quotes the work of Cooper, 1981; de Vries and Miller, 1984; and Kirkpatrick, 1985 in this
respect
10 Adams, J. et al – Transitions – Understanding and Managing Personal Change, 1976, Martin
Robinson



April 2008

7 of 17

---

From Comfort Zone to Performance Management
Alasdair White




Stage 2: defence –people in this stage demonstrate defensive behaviours and try to
force the new reality into the old model that has allowed them to continue to perform
in the current comfort zone. But, defensive behaviour channels effort and energy into
resisting change and not into performance and so there is often a severe decline in
performance. Carnall has noted that ritualistic behaviour emerges as people try to
defend the old ways and postulates that such behaviours have the effect of allowing
the person space in which to come to terms with change. Part of these rituals may be a
demonstrable willingness to attempt the new but with the objective of ‘proving’ that
the new ‘won’t work’ or is simply ‘wrong’.

Stage 3: discarding – Stages 1 and 2 are focused on the past but in Stage 3, people
discard and abandon the old ways of doing things and either commit to new work
methods or invent new ways of acting. A fatalistic attitude often accompanies this
discarding – ‘if things have got to change I suppose we’d better go along with it’.
Behaviours emerge that suggest that people are able to undertake the new actions but
that considerable unwillingness exists and that they want group support. This suggests
a lack of confidence. But, in discarding the old ways and committing to the new, their
self-esteem returns and with it a renewed performance that results in a definite
upward curve.

Stage 4: adaptation – as people adapt to the new realities of their situation, they
expend significant levels of energy on finding ways of making things work. They are
attuning and aligning themselves with what they have to do.11 This boosts self-esteem
and, as Carnall observed, performance starts to recover at a significant rate. This stage
produces acceleration in performance and people are willing and able to do what is
being asked.

Stage 5: internalization – Carnall uses this term to describe how the people involved
have adopted and adapted the new working methods and made them their own – they
have internalised the new procedures. But this very process, which has resulted in
high levels of anxiety, is now ‘running out of steam’ and the growth in performance is
decelerating as the people involved settle towards a new and sustainable level of
performance: a new comfort zone.

The working models: conclusions

Carnall’s coping cycle is a valuable approach to understanding how people deal with
change, but change is an ongoing event and every time a modification of behaviour or
performance is requested, then a new change process starts and a new coping cycle
begins. The behavioural patterns exhibited in each of Carnall’s coping cycle stages
have strong parallels with those observed in the Tuckman group development phases.
This leads the author to conclude that the underlying behavioural processes are the
same: indeed, that, behaviourally, ‘development’ and ‘coping with change’ are,
essentially, the same thing in that both lead from one reasonably steady state to
another. The comparison carried out in this section also leads to the conclusion that
the ‘comfort zone’ model is also just another way of describing the same process.

11 According to the author’s colleague, John Fairhurst, “Attunement is a process, similar to
synchronisation, wherein previously diffuse systems come into alignment, often spontaneously.”



April 2008

8 of 17

---

From Comfort Zone to Performance Management
Alasdair White




If the Tuckman development behaviours and the Carnall coping strategy behaviours
are grouped as in Table 2 then a clear pattern emerges which, the author contends,
demonstrates a close similarity and leads to the conclusion that development and
coping with change are effectively the same thing.


Forming
Unwilling to undertake the
Denial
Constant reference back to
work and unable to do so.
previous performance and
Lack of knowledge and lack
previous models. As they
of skills. Tendency to focus
find the work hard, their
on themselves rather than
self-confidence collapses
the team.
precipitating a dramatic
decline in performance.
Signs of extreme stress
Storming
Willing to attempt the work
Defence
Tries to force the new
but still unable to do so as
realities into the old model.
the skills are missing. High
Energy spent resisting
conflict potential with team
change. Sharp decline in
members. Challenges ideas.
performance. Ritual
Defensive.
behaviours apparent. Energy
spent trying to prove the
new model is wrong. Signs
of extreme stress
Norming
Unwillingness returns,
Discarding
Abandoning the old way and

possibly due to lack of self-
developing new ways of
confidence in newly
working. In need of group
acquired skills, but they are
support. Performance picks
able to do the work. Focus
up as self-esteem returns.
tends to be on rules and
Reduced stress evident
procedures, processes, and
the ‘how’ of the work.
Performing Willing and able to do the
Adaptation
Find ways of making things

work and to act as an
work. Aligned and attuned
effective team. Focus
with the requirements of the
changes to delivery of the
work. Acceleration in
objectives.
performance

Table 2 – Tuckman and Carnall behaviours

The performance curve that is suggested in each of the above models, that of a
sigmoid curve, is based on observational data rather than mathematical analysis,
although the work of McCelland et al. (op. cit) provides empirical evidence to support
the contention. Handy (op. cit.) and Carnall (op. cit.) also propose the same shaped
curve as representative of performance, but neither offers empirical evidence.
However, if we were able to measure performance of humans in the same way as we
can of machines, then it is very probable that a similar performance curve would
result and that it would be ‘sigmoid’ in shape. The author concludes, therefore, that as
the literature and working models cite the sigmoid performance curve so extensively,
it is acceptable to use it as a good representation of the performance described.





April 2008

9 of 17

---

From Comfort Zone to Performance Management
Alasdair White




Section II – the new model

In 2006, the author began a review of the various models relating to performance,
development and the management of change. The result of this review was the
selection for further analysis of the working models discussed in Section I with the
objective of establishing whether they were in fact versions of the same thing and, if
so, to develop a new and simplified working model. Section I provides a detailed
overview of the analysis carried out and the conclusions reached.

During the analysis, it became apparent that in behavioural terms Carnall’s coping
cycle stages and Tuckman’s group development phases overlapped to a very large
degree and the pairings shown in Table 3 were established. Although the behaviours
described are not exactly matched, the closeness of the correlation leads the author to
the conclusion that they are virtually the same.

Tuckman – group development phases
Carnall – coping cycle stages
Forming
Denial
Storming
Defence
Norming
Discarding
Performing
Adaptation
Adjourning (added in 1975)
Internalization

Table 3 – Comparison of the Tuckman Phases and the Carnall Stages

When these pairings were reconsidered in the light of the comfort zone model, and
particularly when the performance curve was taken into account then a further set of
correlations becomes evident and these are shown in Table 4.

Development Phases
Coping Stages
Comfort Zone (Fig. 3)
Performance Model




Forming
Denial

Storming
Defence
First Performance Level
Transforming
Norming
Discarding






Performing
Adaptation
Transition
Performing




Adjourning
Internalization
Second Performance Level
Reforming





Table 4 – Correlation of Development Phases, Coping Stages and Comfort Zone transitions (Fig. 3)
and the Performance Model

In 2007, the author worked with a colleague, John Fairhurst12, to develop a new
simplified working model: the TPR Life-cycle Model shown in Figure 5. They based
their work on the analysis given in Section I and subsequently developed a matrix of
behaviours and appropriate management styles which can be used to help assess the

12 Fairhurst was, at the time, working for an international technology company and was involved in the
management of change.



April 2008

10 of 17

---