Why Game Theory Helps Us See Behaviour — But Readiness Helps Us Change It
For decades, game theory has shaped how economists, strategists, and policy thinkers understand human behaviour. At its core, game theory proposes that people are rational actors who make logical choices based on the conditions they face. Change the conditions, and you change the behaviour.
That idea resonates strongly with my own work on change readiness. In fact, game theory and readiness share a foundational assumption:
Behaviour is not random. It emerges from structure.
But while game theory offers a useful lens, it also has limits. And those limits reveal why organisations struggle with change — and why readiness matters so much.
Let me explain.
1. Game Theory Gets One Big Thing Right: Conditions Shape Behaviour
Game theory assumes that people respond to:
- incentives
- constraints
- risks
- payoffs
- the behaviour of others
In other words, people act according to the game they’re in.
This aligns with a core readiness principle:
If you want different behaviour, change the conditions.
People don’t resist change because they’re stubborn or irrational. They resist because the conditions around them make the new behaviour difficult, unclear, unsafe, or unrewarding.
Game theory helps us see that.
But it doesn’t help us go far enough.
2. Where Game Theory Falls Short: It Assumes Rational Actors
Game theory assumes that people:
- calculate
- optimise
- weigh options
- choose the best outcome
But in real organisations, people often:
- misread the situation
- act from fear
- avoid uncertainty
- protect identity
- follow the crowd
- default to habit
- lack capability
- feel overwhelmed
This isn’t irrationality.
It’s structural limitation.
People act from the structure they have, not the structure they wish they had.
This is where readiness steps in.
3. Readiness Adds the Missing Layer: Capability
Game theory focuses on external conditions.
Readiness focuses on internal capability.
To act differently, people need:
- clarity
- confidence
- identity alignment
- emotional capacity
- peer support
- a stable ecology
- manageable load
Without these, even the best incentives fail.
Game theory can tell you what people will do in a given situation.
Readiness explains why they do it — and how to help them do something different.
4. Game Theory Is Static. Readiness Is Developmental.
Game theory treats people as fully formed actors.
Readiness treats people as developing systems.
People grow.
Teams mature.
Cultures evolve.
Capability expands.
Identity shifts.
Ecology strengthens or weakens.
Change is not a single decision.
It’s a developmental movement.
Game theory can’t model that.
Readiness is built for it.
5. The Real World Is Not a Perfect Game — It’s a Messy System
In real organisations:
- incentives conflict
- goals are unclear
- fear distorts perception
- identity shapes behaviour
- peer groups create pressure
- leaders send mixed signals
- people are overloaded
- capability varies widely
Game theory assumes clean, stable conditions.
Readiness deals with the world as it actually is.
6. The Synthesis: Game Theory Describes Behaviour. Readiness Changes It.
Here’s the relationship in one sentence:
Game theory explains how people respond to the game they’re in.
Readiness explains how to change the game — and help people grow into it.
Game theory gives us the logic of behaviour.
Readiness gives us the architecture of transformation.
One describes.
The other enables.
7. Why This Matters for Leaders
If you assume people are rational actors, you’ll try to change behaviour by:
- offering incentives
- tightening rules
- adding KPIs
- adjusting payoffs
Sometimes that works.
Often it doesn’t.
Because behaviour is not just a function of incentives.
It’s a function of capability + conditions.
Leaders who understand readiness don’t just change the rules of the game.
They change the structure that shapes how people play it.
That’s where transformation happens.