Everyone is to blame - except my subgroup.

Change processes are never exclusively endorsed. They bring movement into existing structures and trigger reactions - approval, resistance, doubt. And in the midst of it all: People who come together in groups. Consciously or unconsciously. In our podcast, we took a closer look at the concept of subgroups - an often overlooked phenomenon that can make a decisive difference when accompanying transformations.

A subgroup is a subgroup within a larger context - this can be a team, an organization or even an inner part of yourself. The decisive factor is not the number, but the dynamics: subgroups are formed by the same perspectives or attitudes. And they influence how change is perceived and shaped.

Subgroups are everywhere. In projects, in meetings, in resistance. They are neither good nor bad. The decisive factor is whether they are functional or dysfunctional.

Dysfunctional communication patterns are characterized by closed boundaries. They confirm each other, filter information selectively and ignore differences. The result is an echo chamber - development is hindered or prevented.

Functional communication patterns, on the other hand, are open. They allow different perspectives, integrate new information and play an active role in shaping it. They help organizations to develop further - even in conflict situations.

Everyone is to blame - except my subgroup.” We have not only encountered this pattern in a professional context. It is often found in hidden accusations, subtle criticism and withdrawal. What can help? A change of perspective: what if we no longer had the word “guilt” at our disposal? This question can open doors - suddenly it's all about responsibility.

In transformation projects, we occasionally observe two dominant subgroups:

- One clearly recognizes the problem and wants to work on a solution.

- The other questions the problem itself - or denies it altogether.

If these two groups clash without mediation, the process stalls. As consultants, we then try not to persuade, but to understand together: What is keeping the subgroup in the status quo? What needs, fears or values are behind it?

A particularly painful phenomenon is scapegoating - the attribution of blame to individuals or groups. Sometimes, as advisors, we ourselves are the target of this projection. One thing in particular helps here: inner clarity, a good support network and the courage to address unpleasant dynamics openly. Not with a pointing finger, but with the aim of bringing the group back into self-responsibility.

Change is not a walk in the park. Sometimes it feels like a path through the brambles - full of thorns, but also full of fruit. In our conversation, the image of the blackberry emerged as a metaphor for survival patterns: powerful, painful, almost impossible to tame - and at the same time full of potential. The question is not how we can get rid of it, but how we can nurture it and work with it.

Subgroups show us what moves people. They reveal differences - and make development possible in the first place. If you want to shape change, you should not only focus on processes and structures, but also on the relationships between them. With affiliation, with demarcation, with what holds groups together or divides them.

Because in the end, it's not about guilt, but about responsibility. Not about control, but about connection. And about finding a solution - that works for everyone.