“You don’t know her like we do.”

We were in a talent review session discussing up-and-coming leaders — who was ready for what, who needed more time, who should get the next big opportunity.

One leader’s name came up.

What people were saying didn’t match what I had seen.

I found myself wondering:

Are we talking about the same person?

I didn’t say that out loud.

But I did share a few examples from recent meetings — situations where several of us had been in the room together. My interpretation of this leader's behavior was pretty different than theirs.

Someone looked at me.

“You don’t know her like we do.”

Fair.

I didn’t.

I’d only worked with her for a few months. I didn’t have the years of accumulated experience they had.

But that was also why I was seeing something different.

I was responding to who she was now.

They were still responding, at least in part, to who she had been.

What I’ve Come to Understand About That Gap

That moment stayed with me.

Because I’ve seen what that gap costs — and how often leaders on both sides of it don’t realize it’s there.

She had been working to shift how she operated.

I saw the newer version.

They kept seeing the older one.

And the older version was still the dominant narrative in the room.

That matters more than people think.

Because careers get shaped inside those conversations.

Stretch opportunities.
Readiness assessments.
Succession discussions.
Who gets trusted with what.

Why This Happens

Here’s what I see happen all the time.

Someone gets feedback, takes it seriously, and starts changing how they lead.

They become less reactive.
More strategic.
Less controlling.
Better at delegation.
More thoughtful cross-functionally.

And initially, the shift feels encouraging.

A meeting goes differently.
A stakeholder responds better.
The conversation feels more productive.

So they keep going.

But after a few weeks, something gets harder.

Not the intention.

The consistency.

The new behavior still requires effort, but the outside response often hasn’t changed yet.

People still interrupt them the same way.
Still escalate the same decisions.
Still respond as if the old pattern is fully intact.

And eventually the person trying to change starts wondering:

Is anyone actually noticing this?

That is the moment where many people drift back.

Not because they are unwilling to change.

Because the old pattern is still socially reinforced.

Every interaction already has momentum.

People expect certain reactions from each other. Certain roles. Certain dynamics.

And when everyone around you continues interacting with you as if you are the old version of yourself, sustaining the new behavior becomes harder than most people expect.

Not impossible.

Just tiring.

The Part Most People Miss

Behavior changes first.

Perception updates later.

Sometimes much later.

That gap creates a strange and difficult stretch where the person changing can feel deeply uncertain.

They know they are doing something differently.

They can feel how much effort it takes.

But externally, the world may still be responding to an older version of them.

That can make real progress feel invisible.

Which is why many people stop too soon.

They try the new behavior.
Do it inconsistently under pressure.
Don’t see immediate evidence that others perceive them differently.
Then quietly slide back into the version everyone already knows.

Not because the change failed.

Because the evidence had not accumulated long enough yet.

Why Outside Perspective Matters

This is one reason meaningful leadership change is hard to sustain alone.

From the inside, drift is difficult to see in real time.

Most people do not suddenly abandon the change.

They loosen it gradually.

A quicker answer here.
Taking back ownership there.
Interrupting instead of staying curious.
Stepping in instead of letting the team work through it.

Small returns to familiar behavior.

That is where outside perspective matters.

Someone who can see the pattern more objectively.
Someone who notices when the old version starts quietly reappearing.

That could be a manager.
A trusted colleague.
A coach.

Ideally, more than one person.

Because lasting change is usually less about insight than reinforcement.

Where Leaders Get This Wrong

This works in the other direction too.

The longer you’ve worked with someone, the stickier your assumptions about them become.

Who is strategic.
Who gets defensive.
Who needs too much direction.
Who is polished.
Who is not quite ready.

Some of those assessments are accurate.

Some are simply old.

And once people develop a stable perception of someone, they often keep filtering new behavior through it.

That is how leaders accidentally hold people in outdated versions of themselves.

Not because they are unfair.

Because accumulated memory can become stronger than fresh observation.

In that talent review session, I watched decisions start getting shaped by a version of someone that no longer fully fit.

It corrected — because someone without the same history spoke up.

But it came closer than it should have.

What Helps the Shift Register

One thing I’ve noticed:

People trying to change often assume the behavior alone will communicate the shift.

Usually it doesn’t.

It helps to give people language for what they are seeing.

Not in a self-conscious or unnatural way.

Just enough to help others reinterpret the behavior in real time.

For example:

“Before I weigh in, I want to hear where the team landed first.”

“Let’s think about the downstream impact before we make a decision.”

“I’m going to stay out of the details here and focus on the tradeoffs.”

You are not announcing a development goal.

You are helping people update the story they have about how you operate.

Without that, people often force new behavior into an old narrative.

And the old narrative usually wins.

This Month’s Experiment

If you are trying to shift how others experience you:

Pick one behavior you are actively working on.

Then ask yourself:

• Who most needs to experience this shift directly?
• Am I doing the new behavior consistently enough for them to notice it?
• And am I giving people enough context to reinterpret what they are seeing?

If you lead people:

Pick one person on your team and pressure-test your assumptions about them.

• What recent evidence supports your current view?
• What recent evidence complicates it?
• Where might you be responding to an older version of someone who has already started changing?

The Bottom Line

Behavior changes first.

Perception updates later.

Sometimes much later.

That gap can be expensive.

For the person trying to grow, it can make meaningful progress feel invisible.

For the leaders evaluating them, it can make outdated perceptions feel accurate long after they stopped being true.

If you are trying to change, stay with the behavior long enough for new evidence to accumulate.

If you are leading someone, keep checking whether your perception has kept pace with who they have become.

If you work with someone who seems different from the story around them, don’t just notice it. Reinforce it. Name the recent evidence others may be missing.

Because sometimes the person in front of you has already changed.

The story just hasn’t caught up yet.

Warmly,
Angela

P.S. The next time someone surprises you—in a good way—say so. That may be the first visible evidence that their story is starting to change.