Everyone Else Should Change

THE EFFECTIVE PROBLEMSOLVER #117

The next time you’re in a meeting about a social issue — gun violence, hunger, immigration reform — try a small experiment.

Just sit back for a minute and notice what keeps happening.

People will talk about what needs to change.

And it’s almost always… someone else.

It’s never:

“I’m really thinking I should do this differently.”
“My behavior might be part of the problem.”

It’s always:

“You know who should act differently?”
“Exactly how I think they should act?”
“Them.”

A politician.
A landlord.
A business owner.
A teacher.

You want to be able to tell other people what to do.

And if they change — and there’s a cost, or something goes wrong — guess who’s holding the bag?

Them.

You get to give advice with no skin in the game.

If things go right, you can say, “that was my idea.”

If things go south… well, you’re out of luck.

I’ve done this. Recently, actually.

Sat in a meeting, very clear on what someone else should do.
Much less clear on what I was actually willing to do differently.

That dynamic — right there — is everywhere. And it has a name.

It’s called the principal–agent problem.

In simple terms, it’s what happens when one group (principals) wants another group (agents) to act on their behalf — but the incentives and risks aren’t aligned.

The principal says, “do this.”
The agent says, “I’ll try.”

But the agent carries the downside.

Versions of this problem show up across economics, politics, and philosophy — anywhere responsibility gets separated from decision-making.

And once you see it, you can’t unsee it.

Especially in social change work.

Because so much of what we call “strategy” is really just:

people telling other people what to do, without owning the consequences.

If you don’t take this seriously, a few things happen.

First, your analysis gets sloppy.

You start assuming that stakeholders will just… do what you think they should do.

You don’t really think through:

• What constraints they’re under

• What incentives they face

• What risks they’re taking on

Second, your strategy becomes performative.

It sounds good in a meeting.
It signals the right values.
It puts pressure on the “right” people.

But it doesn’t actually change behavior.

Because no one has to own it.

I’ve seen this play out in workforce programs.

Funders push providers to hit outcome targets.
Providers push staff to move people through faster.
Staff push clients to take the next available job.

Everyone is acting rationally.

And no one is really owning whether the system is actually helping people get stable employment.

This is why boundaries matter so much.

And not in a personal wellness sense.

In a problem-solving sense.

Boundaries are about:

• Who gets to decide what

• Who defines the problem

• Who is actually responsible for taking action

And just as importantly:

• What you can and cannot control

This is where most efforts quietly fall apart.

Because we blur these lines.

We act like:

• We can define the problem for everyone

• We can assign responsibility to anyone

• We can expect action from people we don’t actually influence

But you can’t just make this stuff up as you go.

Social change is more than getting a bigger microphone than everyone else and telling them what to do.

The deeper level is this:

What can you do?

Where is your actual influence?

What decisions are you responsible for?

What risks are you willing to take on?

That’s a very different posture.

That’s not:

• “They should fix this.”

That’s:

• “Here’s where I have influence, and here’s what I’m going to do with it.”

That’s responsibility.

Good problem solving sits right in the middle of all this:

• Understanding the problem

• Mapping the stakeholders

• Being clear about boundaries

• And then taking pragmatic action within your actual sphere of control

Not idealized control.
Not imagined authority.

Real influence.

Not telling others what to do — but deciding what you will do.

There’s a way to do this rigorously — to combine problem analysis, stakeholder thinking, and action in a way that actually leads somewhere.

For those who want to explore it, that’s exactly what my course is built around.

The next time you’re in one of those meetings, notice who you think should change.

Then ask yourself a harder question:

If they don’t… what are you going to do differently?

See you in two weeks.

-Bryan