Applying The Big Five Personality Traits to Change Management

a) Readiness assessment

When planning change, one useful step is to assess or at least consider the personality/dispositional landscape of the individuals or teams involved. For example:

• People high in Openness are likely to be more comfortable with novel ideas, ambiguity, innovation; this means they may be “early adopters” of change, more willing to engage and explore.
• People lower in Openness may prefer familiar routines, predictable structures; they may resist or drag their feet unless change is framed carefully.
• Higher Neuroticism (or lower emotional stability) may mean individuals feel threatened by change, worry about loss, or experience more stress during transitions.
• Higher Conscientiousness might mean people are reliable, structured; they may do well in implementing change if the path is clear but may struggle if the change is chaotic or poorly defined.
• Agreeableness might support cooperation and social harmony during change; low agreeableness may mean more conflict or push-back.
• Extraversion may influence how people respond in communication and social aspects of change (eg, networking, support roles).

Understanding these tendencies helps you anticipate where resistance or slower uptake might occur.

b) Tailoring change strategy and communication

Based on the above, you might design interventions that align with different personality profiles:

• For lower-openness individuals, leaders need to emphasise why the change is needed, and how it preserves important aspects, provides structure, reduces ambiguity, etc.
• For higher-openness individuals, leaders need to leverage their curiosity and innovation; by giving them roles as change champions, solicit their ideas, etc.
• For those prone to neuroticism/anxiety, provide reassurance, frequent communication, support mechanisms and acknowledge their concerns explicitly, etc.
• For conscientious types, emphasise implementation plans, roles, accountability; involve them in planning and execution because they will value clarity, etc.
• For extraverts/’agreeables’, to create opportunities for peer support, visible champions, collaborative work groups, etc.
• For those less socially inclined, to provide clear individual tasks, avoid assuming everyone will jump into group workshops, etc.

c) Managing resistance and emotional/behavioural reactions

Emphasise that reaction to change is not one-dimensional, it includes:

• feelings (I’m anxious/comfortable),
• cognition (I think this is good/bad)
• behaviour (what I do: support, resist).

By linking personality to these reactions, you can be proactive: eg, people low in openness may have negative cognitive beliefs (“This change is unnecessary”), so try to engage them cognitively with evidence, logic, involvement.

Others may have more resistance around feelings (“I’m upset, worried”), so endeavour to engage emotionally (empathy, listening, reassurance).

d) Strategic implications for facilitation and leadership

You can embed these ideas:

• In designing a workshop, include modules on how different individuals may react to change (linking to the Big Five) so participants understand their own and others’ responses.
• Use this approach in stakeholder management: when you map stakeholders, consider their personality predispositions (if you can assess them or at least know them) to target your approach.
• During leadership briefings: help senior leaders recognise that “resistance” is often less about defiance and more about personality/context interplay; this reduces blame and promotes support.
• In the strategy phase of change: build in communication plans and support structures that recognise these individual different factors; for instance, peer networks, mentors aligned by personality fit, small-group sessions for low openness folks, ideation sessions for high openness participants.

e) Limitations and caution

• Personality traits are not destiny. They shape predispositions, but context, leadership, culture, structure, etc still matter heavily.
• Be careful of falling into the trap of over-labelling or rigid typologies; use this Big 5 framework as a lens, not a complete explanation.
• If you try to measure personality formally in an organisation, ethical/consent/privacy issues arise. Often you will rely on heuristics or team-facilitation rather than formal testing.
• Change effectiveness still depends strongly on good change management practices (communication, leadership, resources, fit, etc) rather than only on personality. The Big Five is just one piece of the puzzle.

(main source: Shaul Oreg, 2006)

Summary

Know your audience, stakeholders, etc so that you are able to pitch your approach to suit your audience, etc.

For example, for professional development, curriculum change and facilitation, here are a tailored set of actions you might consider:

• When you roll out a new curriculum change, such as embedding First Nations inventions into Australian Curriculum v9.0), map likely stakeholder personality dispositions in your target group (teachers, staff, etc). For instance:
  • Some teachers may be enthusiastic for innovation (high openness) and can act as early adopters/champions.
  • Others may value stability and wish for incremental change; frame the change as an extension of existing practice, rather than radical revision.
• Design your PD (professional development) sessions with differentiated tracks. For example: one track focusing on creative exploration (for those comfortable with change), another focusing on implementation and structure (for those less comfortable).
• Build facilitation activities that flesh out personality awareness: e.g., a session about “How do we each respond when change is proposed?” using Big Five language (just at a high-level) to foster self-insight and peer understanding.
• In your change strategy documentation, include a “people profile” section: “What are we likely to see from people with low openness?” + “How will we engage them?” This makes your facilitation strategy more nuanced.
• Monitor feedback during change roll‐out: watch for signs of cognitive objections (people saying “I don’t believe this change makes sense”) vs affective objections (“I’m upset/worried”). Link these back to your personality lens so you can adapt communication.

Big Five Personality Traits and Reactions to Change

Applied summary for change management

(main source: Shaul Oreg, 2006)

Some Ways to Use Information in the Above Table

1. Change-readiness scan
Even without formal personality testing, leaders and facilitators can infer patterns in a team. You can ask:

• Who is excited by novelty versus routine?
• Who urgently seeks clarity?
• Who lifts others socially?
• Who becomes anxious without information?

2. Tailored communication
Different segments need different messages.
Example: a single update email will reassure some but amplify fear for others who need dialogue.

3. Assign roles that fit strengths
Every trait has a value in change. Matching strengths to an apt phase makes the transition smoother.

4. Reduce misinterpretations
Instead of “He is negative,” a team can reframe: “He has low openness and needs more time and detail.”

This reduces blame and increases empathy.

Simple workshop activity to implement:

Change Reactions Map

1. Introduce the 5 traits and ask people to self-place for each trait on a low-medium-high spectrum.
2. Prompt them to reflect on what support helps them during change.
3. In pairs, exchange what others can do to help them feel safe and confident.
4. Capture themes into a team “Change Support Charter.”

The activity builds both insight and relational trust.

(main sources: KI Sivaprasad et al, 2025; Shaul Oreg, 2006)