5 Neuroscience Insights That Help to Explain How Leadership Is Changing

What the SCARF model reveals from the NeuroLeadership Institute’s 2025 research

Yesterday (February 2026), I attended a webinar hosted by the NeuroLeadership Institute, where they presented findings from their 2025 research related to the SCARF model. A few years ago, in 2018, I had the pleasure of attending the NeuroLeadership Institute’s Brain-Based Conversational Skills training. That is where David Rock’s SCARF model was introduced, which has since been a useful tool in leadership development and coaching work.

SCARF is an excellent framework for understanding five social drivers that can move us from our executive functioning center, where we are clear, thoughtful, and grounded, into a threat response where we are operating “under” stress. That "under state" is where the amygdala takes over and we shift into fight, flight, or freeze. In 2025, the NeuroLeadership Institute revisited SCARF and re-studied the leading drivers across general society. What they discovered was not that SCARF needed to be replaced or expanded. No new variables were required, and none were removed. Instead, what changed was the order of importance.  In coaching work, when people are triggered, it is common to see several SCARF domains at play. Additionally, leaders also need to continue to have awareness and directly communicate to hit all drivers to create safety. The assessment is interesting, however, because it highlights the primary drivers that were most sensitive in 2012 compared to how those drivers have reordered in 2025. This 2025 re-polling helps reveal what is changing and what is becoming more important for people, which in turn impacts how leaders communicate and lead effectively.

5 SCARF shifts that help leaders communicate well:

1. Certainty Is No Longer a Motivator, but It Is Still Required

Certainty (SCARF): Refers to the brain’s need to predict what will happen and understand what to expect. For years, especially through COVID, certainty was the dominant SCARF driver. Leaders were encouraged to provide clarity, predictability, and reassurance. In seasons of disruption, this helped stabilize people and calm the nervous system. The 2025 research showed something notable. Certainty has now shifted to last in priority. This surprised me as leaders sharing what they DO know is still essential.

To be clear, the move to #5 does not mean certainty no longer matters. When certainty is missing, people often experience confusion, anxiety, or distraction as the brain registers a threat. What has changed is its role. Certainty has become a baseline expectation rather than a source of engagement. When it is present, people feel steadier, but not necessarily more motivated. Certainty prevents disruption. It does not create momentum. So, for leaders, providing certainty is a foundation and starting place.

2. Certainty and Relatedness Now Function as “Hygiene Factors” (Formerly the top SCARF drivers)

Relatedness (SCARF): Refers to the need to feel connected and part of a group. Relatedness shows up through questions like: Am I part of the team? Do I belong here? Am I inside or outside the group? (note: it is related to, but distinct from, status. Status is about whether I matter and whether my role is clear. Relatedness is about whether I fit and am part of the whole.)  Certainty and relatedness were the first and second SCARF drivers in 2012. In the 2025 research, both have declined in priority, not because they are unimportant, but because they are now assumed.

Along with certainty, relatedness now functions as what motivation research calls a hygiene factor. A hygiene factor prevents dissatisfaction, but it does not create motivation. When certainty or relatedness is missing, people often feel disconnected, distracted, insecure, or threatened. When they are present, people feel more stable and grounded, but not necessarily energized or engaged. These needs support baseline functioning rather than performance fuel. For a long time, relatedness ranked very high. That makes sense. Social media, workplace visibility, and cultural movements heightened awareness around belonging, inclusion, and being seen. There was significant focus on connection, identity, and voice, and relatedness became central to how people experienced work and community.

What seems to be shifting now is how people establish safety and clarity under pressure. Relatedness still matters, but it is no longer what people rely on first to stay regulated and able to move forward. As work accelerates, changes faster, and becomes more ambiguous, people have less capacity to hold everything at once. This is not selfishness. It is a necessary focus and self-orientation to stay clear under pressure and change. When things move quickly and feel less predictable, people naturally work to orient themselves first. They want to understand what is happening, where they stand, and what control or influence they have before they can fully orient to others or the broader system. For leaders, this does not mean relatedness disappears. It becomes foundational and often operates in the background. Leaders need to continue to provide relatedness through clear information sharing, inclusion in conversations that affect people, reinforcing team context and shared direction, and maintaining regular points of connection through meetings and collaboration.  What has changed is that belonging alone is no longer what helps people stay above, focused, and able to move forward.
Fairness, autonomy, and clarity of role now do more of that work, while certainty and relatedness remain essential foundations. Certainty and relatedness create safety. They do not, on their own, create progress.

3. Fairness Has Become the Primary Driver of Engagement and Safety

Fairness (SCARF): Refers to the perception of fair exchanges and equitable treatment.

In 2025, fairness moved to the top of the SCARF priorities and is now the strongest driver overall. It has become the primary motivator shaping whether people stay regulated, engaged, and willing to move forward. This reflects an increased sensitivity to transparency, consistency, and trust in systems. People are less focused on intent and more focused on process. What actually happened. How decisions were made. Whether outcomes were applied consistently. Fairness often shows up internally through questions people are asking, sometimes without naming them directly: Is this fair? Can I trust this system? Do I need to protect or advocate for myself here?

When fairness is unclear or inconsistent, the brain registers threat regardless of tone, care, or good intentions. Fairness is not an emotional preference. It is a structural requirement. When people do not trust the process, they cannot stay above. Energy shifts toward vigilance, self-protection, and comparison rather than contribution.

For leaders, this is a meaningful shift. Fairness is no longer created primarily through reassurance or relational intent. It is created through design. Clear decision criteria. Transparent processes. Consistent application. Visible logic behind choices. When people can see how decisions are made and understand how standards are applied, the system feels safer, even when outcomes are difficult.

This also explains why fairness is now so tightly connected to agency. In environments where trust is lower or systems feel unclear, people become more attuned to whether they have a voice and a way to advocate for themselves. Fairness creates the conditions where people can stay engaged without needing to constantly self-protect. As the new number one driver, fairness is doing more of the work certainty and relatedness used to do. It stabilizes the system, reduces friction, and allows people to stay focused and move forward.

4. Autonomy Has Increased as Work Has Become Faster, More Distributed, and Less Centralized

Autonomy (SCARF): Refers to a sense of control over events and choices.

Autonomy rose sharply in importance, moving from the lowest SCARF drivers in 2012 to the second highest in 2025. This shift reflects how work has changed. Work is moving faster. People are being asked to perform quickly, adapt in real time, and operate with more ambiguity than in the past.  In that environment, autonomy is not about independence for a selfish “my way” sake. It is about orientation and agency. People are trying to answer questions like: What is my role? What is my job? Where do I fit in this system? How am I expected to think and act here? Autonomy helps people locate themselves so they can move forward with clarity rather than hesitation.

At an organizational level, autonomy also shows up through broader questions such as: How much authority do I actually have? Where do decisions get made? What am I empowered to decide versus escalate? Am I expected to think independently or simply execute instructions? When these answers are unclear, people slow down, over-check, or disengage, not because they lack motivation, but because they lack permission and clarity.

Autonomy also shows up internally through questions like: Do I have a say here? Can I do this in a way that makes sense to me? Are my thinking and approach respected? Am I being asked to move fast and deliver at a high level, but without the trust to execute in a way that fits how I work best? This is not selfishness. It is a practical response to speed, pressure, and constant change. When people can work in ways that align with how they think, they are quicker, more nimble, and more effective.

This creates a real tension for leaders. Leaders hold the bigger picture and the broader context. They see risks others cannot yet see. As pace accelerates, leaders are often tempted to reduce variability by telling people how to do the work. From the employee side, this can feel like micromanagement. From the leadership side, it often comes from responsibility, not control. The answer is not less structure. It is a better design. This is why co-designing is essential and part of empowering autonomy and is a needed ingredient in leadership and communication today.  

Autonomy works best as bounded autonomy. Leaders clarify the why, where, and what matters most, then co-design the how through stronger communication, shared understanding, and explicit agreements. Clear outcomes, clear guardrails, and clear decision rights allow people to move with freedom while staying aligned to the larger direction. In a fast-moving environment, autonomy paired with clarity is what allows people to stay focused, adaptive, and engaged without drifting off course.

This tension around autonomy naturally leads into the next SCARF shift around status. As leadership has evolved from a leader above (2.0), to a leader below or in service (3.0), to a leader beside (4.0–5.0), people are no longer just asking what is fair or how much freedom do they have. They are also trying to understand where they stand in the system. What is my role? How do I contribute? How do I add value? Do I matter here?  The reordering of SCARF reflects this progression. People are first trying to determine what is fair, then how much agency they have, and then where they fit and how they are seen. Certainty and relatedness remain important foundations underneath, but fairness, autonomy, and status now shape how people orient, engage, and move forward.

5. Status Is Rising as People Look for Orientation, Role Clarity, and Meaning

Status (SCARF): Refers to relative importance to others, including role clarity, respect, and value.
Status moved upward in the 2025 reordering, rising from the lower tier in 2012 to the middle of the SCARF priorities. As work accelerates, roles blur, and change happens faster, people are having a harder time orienting themselves.

Status often shows up through quieter questions people carry: Do I matter here? Is my role clear? Am I seen and valued in this system?

This rise in status follows naturally after fairness and autonomy. When people trust the system and feel they have agency, they still need clarity about where they fit and how they add value. While ambiguity is increasing, leaders cannot offload the responsibility to reduce unnecessary ambiguity. Clarifying roles, naming contribution, and affirming value remain essential leadership work.

Status becomes a stabilizing force that supports engagement and partnership in times of change.

5. Status Is Rising as People Look for Orientation, Role Clarity, and Meaning

Status (SCARF): Refers to relative importance to others, including role clarity, respect, and value.

Status moved upward in the 2025 reordering, shifting from tied for 3–4 in 2012 to #3 in 2025. It is still in the middle of the SCARF priorities, but the upward movement is notable. As work accelerates, roles blur, and change happens faster, people are having a harder time orienting themselves and understanding their place in the system. In the past, status might have been commonly experienced through hierarchy and comparison. For some, that showed up as a sensitivity to feeling talked down to, overlooked, or diminished by title, authority, or ego dynamics. Leaders had to be aware of equalizing or creating space for people (i.e. sit down while talking to someone rather than towering over them).

I believe that is still important and there is an additional layer with status. Again, with the speed of things and the leading two factors of fairness and anatomy, I believe status can follow with quieter, internal questions people are carrying: Do I matter here? Is my role clear? Am I seen and valued in this system? These questions are less about being better than others and more about not becoming invisible, interchangeable, or unclear as systems flatten and move faster.  To me, this makes sense for status to follow naturally after fairness and autonomy. Once people trust the system and feel they have agency, they still need to understand where they stand and how they contribute. Without that clarity, even well-intended environments can leave people feeling unsettled or unsure of how to engage. This is where leadership posture matters. Leadership has continued to shift from leading above (2.0), to leading in service (3.0), to leading beside (4.0–5.0). In this posture, status is not about leaders minimizing themselves or inflating others. It is about leaders calling people up by clarifying roles, naming contribution, and reinforcing why someone’s work matters to the whole. When fairness and autonomy are in place, status becomes a stabilizing force. It helps people feel oriented rather than lost, confident rather than insecure, and able to partner and move forward in times of change. This helps to give people clarity and confidence which then naturally finishes with certain and relatedness, because those feel a natural progression of safety and security allowing people to self-orient, thrive and elevate.

What This Means for Leadership Today

Modern leadership is less about calming people through reassurance and more about creating environments that have clarity and support for people to operate at their best.

That includes communicating in a way that helps people to understand:

• Clear decision rights
• Transparent processes
• Explicit expectations
• Meaningful choice in execution
• Fair and visible criteria for performance and opportunity

Certainty and belonging remain foundational. But autonomy and fairness are now the primary drivers of ownership, engagement, and sustained performance.

This is important not only for work, but drivers show up in families, friendships, and communities as well. These are keys for leadership and communication in general.
The reordering helps us to understand the sensitivities and allows for more intentional messaging and responses, rather than reactive ones, across all areas of life.

The SCARF model has not changed because human brains have not changed. What has changed is the world leaders are operating in.

Leadership today requires less control and more design. Less reassurance and more structural clarity. Less managing people and more building environments where people can thrive.

That is significant and worth paying attention to and deliberately designing as we strive to communicate, connect and lead well.

### 

QUESTION: 
Where do you notice your own sense of safety or threat being most influenced right now (applying the SCARF traits)?
Which of these shifts do you notice most shaping how people respond around you right now?
How can we use SCARF to help lead better in response and creating safety?