The Reality Delta: How Leaders Misread Reality

"I've watched this pattern repeat across organizations: a new technology, program, or policy launches with great enthusiasm. Budgets are approved. Dashboards go live. Reality sets in and momentum dies. When that happens, it's tempting to blame "resistance." But more often, the problem is simpler and more human: leaders are making decisions based on a version of reality that isn't the one people are living."

"Reality deltas don't show up in strategy decks or steering committees. Instead, they surface as unseen behaviors and unheard concerns, like: An extra step someone adds because the "new process" breaks in real life. A shadow spreadsheet running alongside the "single source of truth." A veteran's shrug: "We've always done it this way" (because the workaround is safer). Quiet anxiety about AI: "If I use this to automate, will I be judged, replaced, or blamed if it's wrong?""

"Reality deltas are early warning lights. When the gap persists, it creates predictable costs: The wrong people get rewarded. Conscientious employees get overloaded. Shadow systems multiply (spreadsheets, local databases, unofficial automations). Work slows down (double entry, extra checks, exception handling). Risk rises (compliance gaps, audit surprises, ungoverned AI use). Change fatigue builds ("this too shall pass," so people disengage faster next time)."

Reality deltas arise when leaders' assumptions about how work happens diverge from employees' lived experiences. These gaps manifest as unseen behaviors and unheard concerns: added steps to fix broken processes, shadow spreadsheets, reliance on safe workarounds, and anxiety about automation. Persistent reality deltas produce predictable costs: misaligned rewards, overloaded conscientious employees, proliferating shadow systems, slower work through double-entry and extra checks, increased compliance and audit risk, and growing change fatigue. A cognitive bias called naive realism and organizational silence help create and conceal these gaps, causing leaders to miss early warning signs of operational friction.

Read at Psychology Today