/bks/images/image-o0b82.png)
It is easy to assume that if people know what to do, they will do it.
In most organisations, people are capable, experienced, and generally trying to do a good job. They understand processes, agree with goals, and can often describe what 'good' looks like. Yet the behaviour does not always follow: things drift, standards slip, and good intentions do not quite translate into consistent performance.
Knowing and doing are related - but they are not the same thing.
I have often defined knowledge as the capacity to act. If I know how to ride a bicycle, I can physically get on one and ride it. If I know how to drive, I can get in a car and drive from A to B safely and legally. Even if I have not done these things for a while, the underlying capability is still there - although it may need a little skill sharpening before I am fully confident again.
Organisations are full of this kind of latent capability. People know how to run effective meetings, provide useful feedback, prioritise work sensibly, follow processes, and solve problems. But organisations do not run on what people could do; they run on what people actually do.
Knowledge on its own creates possibility.
Performance requires application of that knowledge.
Knowledge also needs to be kept current. Many capabilities are perishable. Someone may know how to structure a good review conversation, analyse a problem properly, or manage a project plan. But if they rarely do these things, the skill becomes rusty. The capacity to act is still present, but the quality and confidence of execution may not be.
Learning, practice, experience, observation, and reflection are all ways in which knowledge develops and sharpens into skill. Training can play a role, but it is only one of many ways people learn. Much learning happens informally through doing the work itself.
Even when knowledge and skill are present, behaviour does not always follow. That is usually not because people are careless or unwilling. More often, there is something in the work environment that makes the right 'doing' behaviour less likely to happen consistently. Perhaps:
In other words, the environment has to make good performance possible, and preferably easier.
A useful way to think about this is as a progression:
Many organisational frustrations occur in the gaps between these elements.
Sometimes people know what to do but are not clear that it is truly a priority. Sometimes they understand the idea but have not yet had enough opportunity to practise. Sometimes they are capable but the workflow makes the task unnecessarily difficult. Sometimes expectations are not fully aligned. And sometimes ownership is unclear, so important things fall between responsibilities.
This is where leadership and management matter. Leaders influence whether knowledge turns into performance by shaping the environment in which people operate. Expectations, priorities, clarity, support, feedback, and the general tone of the organisation all affect whether people are able - and willing - to apply what they know.
In building a high functioning team or organisation, I am a great fan of the Engagement–Development–Performance Cycle (EDP).
If any part of that cycle is weak, performance will usually be inconsistent. Performance, or lack of it, will be the visible symptom, the causes are often deeper and frequently systemic. People operate within a behavioural system, and the most effective solutions usually address the system, not just the individual.
Here are a few practical areas for leaders to focus on to help maintain and strengthen the connection between knowing and doing:
1. Make expectations explicit. Don’t assume everyone shares the same picture of what 'good' looks like. It is easy for people to sound aligned in meetings; however, the real question is whether the behaviour shows up in practice. Clarify expectations, standards, and outcomes so people understand what matters and what 'done' means.
2. Remove friction from the system. If doing the right thing is difficult, time-consuming, or confusing, it will not happen consistently. Look for unnecessary complexity, unclear handoffs, conflicting priorities, or poorly designed tools. Wherever possible, make doing the right thing easier than doing the wrong thing.
3. Support ongoing learning. Capability needs to be maintained and sharpened. Ensure people have the opportunity to practise and refine important skills, rather than assuming one explanation or workshop is sufficient. Feedback plays an important role here; people generally want to know whether they are doing a good job, and how they can improve.
4. Create an environment where people want to contribute. People are more likely to apply what they know when they feel their contribution is valued and that their efforts make a difference. A sense of connection, trust, and usefulness encourages people to engage their judgement and initiative, rather than simply comply at the minimum level required.
5. Provide enough structure for consistency. Consistent performance should not depend entirely on individual motivation or memory. Clear routines and processes, simple checklists, regular reviews, and agreed ways of working help good practice become repeatable, while still leaving room for judgement, initiative, and creativity where these add value.
6. Make ownership visible. Accountability is not about blame. It is about clarity. When ownership is understood and commitments are visible, follow-through becomes part of the normal rhythm of work rather than something that requires constant prompting.
The goal is therefore not simply to create more knowledgeable people. Most organisations already have a great deal of knowledge.
The real challenge is creating an environment in which knowledge is able to flow into action -consistently and reliably.
When expectations are clear, friction is reduced, learning is continuous, contribution is valued, structure supports good practice, and ownership is visible, the gap between knowing and doing begins to close.
And when that gap closes, performance improves, not because people suddenly become more capable, but because the organisation becomes better at enabling the capability it already has.
And that is where sustainable performance comes from.
Ad Futurum
Graham