The compliance trap: How silence in your organisation may be masking disengagement

When organisations discuss change, the conversation often centres on frameworks, roadmaps, and carefully crafted communication plans. Yet, as Gayatheri Silvakumer, Vice-President of People and Culture at Star Alliance, observed during a recent Asia HR Leaders Live Series, change rarely fails because of poor strategy. It fails because leaders overlook the human experience beneath it.

Speaking with Rita Tsui, Founder of AsiaHRM, Silvakumer unpacked what it truly takes to turn personal change into shared purpose, drawing on hard-earned lessons from regional and global leadership roles. Her message was clear: alignment alone is not enough. Without emotional connection, even the most well-designed change effort risks becoming performative compliance rather than genuine ownership.

Change is emotional before it is rational

One of the most persistent myths in organisational change is the assumption that clarity leads to alignment. In reality, Silvakumer noted, change first triggers emotion—long before employees engage with strategy or structure.

“Change immediately raises questions of identity, comfort, safety, and belonging,” she explained. “People are not asking, ‘Do I understand the strategy?’ They are asking, ‘What does this mean for me?’”

Whether it is a new system, a restructuring, or a shift in operating model, change disrupts familiar routines and challenges an individual’s sense of competence and security. Leaders who rush into explanations without acknowledging this emotional disruption risk widening the gap between intent and impact.

This, Silvakumer argued, is where many organisations falter. Communication becomes one-directional. Messages are delivered, but the connection is missing. Employees are expected to quietly bridge the emotional gap on their own, and when they struggle, they are labelled as resistant.

When compliance masquerades as success

A recurring theme throughout the session was the distinction between compliance and ownership. While compliance may look like progress, it often masks disengagement.

“Compliance is quiet,” Silvakumer said. “People follow instructions, confirm, accept, and move on. Ownership, by contrast, is noisy. It asks questions, challenges assumptions, and seeks to do things better.”

In many organisations, silence is mistakenly interpreted as alignment. Leaders may feel reassured when employees do not push back or question decisions. Yet high-performing and high-potential employees are often the ones who probe, debate, and test ideas. Their questions are not resistance; they are signals of engagement.

True ownership, Silvakumer emphasised, is about responsibility for outcomes—not just execution of tasks. Employees who own change will continue to refine and improve it, even when leaders are not in the room.

One of the most practical insights from the session was Silvakumer’s insistence that change should not begin once the plan is complete. Instead, it should start much earlier. “The journey doesn’t begin when you have the answers,” she said. “It begins when you invite people into the thinking.”

By involving employees from the outset—before decisions are fully formed—leaders reduce uncertainty, build trust, and shut down emotional resistance before it takes root. The approach reframes change from something imposed to something co-created.

Crucially, this does not mean leaders relinquish accountability. Rather, they design conditions that allow employees to understand how change fits into their day-to-day work, career progression, and long-term contribution to the organisation.

Create space, not scripts

If leaders could do just one thing to turn resistance into engagement, Silvakumer’s answer is simple: create space.

Not a scripted town hall or a one-off briefing, but an intentional space for employees to talk about how change is landing for them—before being asked to act on it. These conversations, she stressed, are not about leaders becoming therapists, but about being emotionally literate.

“Acknowledgement goes a long way,” she said. “People need to feel seen and heard. And they can tell when care is genuine—and when it is not.”

Effective change conversations are thoughtful, contextual, and repeated over time. They help employees locate themselves within the change, rather than leaving them to make sense of it on their own.

Silvakumer illustrated these principles through Star Alliance’s own transformative journey. After 26 years as a legacy organisation headquartered in Europe, the alliance relocated to Asia and embarked on a fundamental shift in its operations—without compromising trust among its diverse member airlines.

READ MORE: Unlearning success: Why your past leadership wins could be your future liabilities

Rather than imposing a leader-driven transformation, Star Alliance focused on building shared awareness. Employees across the organisation were empowered to surface gaps, identify what was broken, and distinguish between issues requiring immediate action and those that could evolve over time.

This collective diagnosis created ownership. Change was no longer something communicated by leadership; it became something employees believed in.

Performance management was redesigned around skills progression rather than hierarchy. Systemic blockers were identified through deep listening. Leaders consistently reinforced behaviours and decision-making norms, prioritising intent over rigid adherence to frameworks.

“It took three years,” Silvakumer acknowledged. “And it was not smooth. But today, people make decisions without waiting for permission. That’s when you know change has become part of how work gets done.”

Honouring the human experience of change

As organisations navigate constant disruption—from technology shifts to workforce transformation—Silvakumer’s reflections offer a timely reminder: sustainable change does not come from perfect frameworks alone.

It comes from honouring the human experience.

Structure matters. Strategy matters. But how leaders show up, how they build trust, and how they invite people into the journey ultimately determines whether change is endured—or truly owned.