Many organisations invest significant time and effort developing information governance policies. They run training, communicate expectations, and secure leadership support. On paper, everything looks ready for success.

Yet the everyday reality often looks very different.

Information governance doesn’t usually fail due to poor policy or flawed technology. It fails because the surrounding culture doesn’t support the behaviours required to make it work.

Culture is not something to smooth over at the end of a project. It is the environment in which governance either takes root or quietly collapses. When that environment pushes against governance, culture wins every time.

Drawing on experience supporting a range of professional services organisations, it’s clear that certain cultural patterns make adoption significantly harder. Understanding those patterns is the first step toward overcoming them.

Why Organisational Culture Presents Challenges

‍People Trust Their Own Ways of Working
‍Professionals often build personal systems over many years. Whether it’s how they organise client files, manage emails, or store working papers, these approaches feel efficient because they’ve become second nature.

A centralised governance programme can therefore be seen as disruptive rather than helpful. Standardised taxonomies, retention rules, or mandated systems can feel like a judgement on long-standing habits that have always “worked well enough”.

Resistance in these situations is rarely driven by lack of care. It is more about a sense that autonomy is being questioned.

Commercial Pressures Shape Daily Priorities
‍In most organisations—particularly those with client-facing teams—productivity and responsiveness carry significant weight. Anything that feels administrative or indirect in terms of client value tends to slip down the priority list.

Tasks such as classification, applying retention decisions, or completing governance training often fall into this category. They are recognised as important but are easily deferred when client demands intensify.

Senior staff experience this tension most acutely. When deadlines are tight, governance requirements are among the first things set aside.

Shared Leadership Makes Enforcement Difficult
‍Partnership or peer-based leadership models create cultural complexity. Even when a COO, managing partner, or risk lead strongly supports governance, they may not have the authority—or appetite—to enforce it rigorously across senior teams.

If governance is optional for influential individuals, it quickly becomes optional for everyone. Culture follows the behaviour of those with the most status, whether that behaviour is aligned with policy or not.

Responsiveness to Clients Overrides Procedure
‍When a client asks for something urgently, the instinct is to respond immediately. If governance steps appear to slow that response, they are often ignored.

People assume—sometimes correctly—that the client values speed more than process. Governance becomes the thing to skip in order to appear efficient.

Over time, this shapes a culture in which policy is treated as secondary to immediacy.

Common Warning Signs of Cultural Resistance
‍
Several patterns frequently signal that culture is limiting governance progress.
‍
‍Governance Seen as “Someone Else’s Responsibility”
‍Different groups assume others own governance. IT expects risk teams to enforce it. Risk expects operations to drive it. Operational staff expect client-facing teams to apply it. This diffusion of responsibility creates gaps and prevents momentum.

Different Expectations for Different Roles
‍Support teams follow protocols thoroughly, while senior professionals may not. This creates frustration, weakens trust, and undermines the message that governance matters across the organisation.

Workarounds Become Embedded in Practice
‍When policies feel impractical, people informally teach each other shortcuts. These workarounds quickly become the unofficial way of operating, often passed on to new joiners as “how things are really done”.

‍Governance Only Discussed After Something Goes Wrong
‍If governance surfaces only after a breach, complaint, or internal audit finding, the organisation is operating reactively. Once the immediate concern fades, governance falls out of focus again.

Mandatory Training Not Taken Seriously
‍Late completions, rushed participation, or lack of consequences indicate that governance training isn’t valued. The word “mandatory” loses its meaning, and culture follows behaviour rather than policy.

Why Traditional Approaches Fall Short

‍Expecting Adoption Because the System Is Good
‍Implementing a well-designed policy or advanced  information governance system does not guarantee behavioural change. Governance success depends far more on cultural alignment than technical quality.

Relying on Training Alone
‍Training addresses awareness, not prioritisation. Most people know what they should do; they just don’t see it as important enough in the moment.

Using Rewards or Penalties in Isolation
‍Incentivising compliance or punishing non-compliance may produce short-term reactions but rarely creates lasting commitment. Governance needs to feel relevant, not forced.

What Helps Organisations Make Governance Stick
‍
I’ve seen several approaches consistently make a difference.
‍
Align Governance With Existing Values and Pressures
‍Governance gains traction when people understand how it supports core priorities:
‍
‍Client service – Faster retrieval of records, smoother onboarding, and stronger confidentiality controls.
‍Professional standards – Clear evidence trails, reliable documentation, and reduced personal risk.
‍Operational efficiency – Less duplication, fewer data issues, and more predictable workflows.

Governance should feel like a tool that enables good work, not a competing administrative burden.

Engage Influential Voices Early
‍Cultural change is more effective when respected individuals demonstrate governance behaviours openly. These are not always people with formal governance responsibilities—they are people others naturally follow.

When these individuals use the approved systems, talk about the benefits, and follow the same rules as everyone else, cultural resistance decreases sharply.

Place Governance Within Existing Routines
‍Rather than creating extra meetings or processes, integrate governance into what already happens:

– A brief update in regular team meetings
– A governance checkpoint during client engagement setup
– Incusion of governance behaviours in performance reviews

This reduces friction and signals that governance is part of everyday operations.

Use Stories Instead of Statistics
‍Real examples resonate far more than compliance data:

– A project that ran more smoothly because documents were correctly classified
– A near-miss avoided due to proper security controls
– A client praising the organisation’s handling of confidential data

People remember stories. They rarely remember percentages.

Align Incentives Without Overhauling Systems
‍You don’t need to redesign appraisal frameworks entirely, but governance should be visible in how performance is assessed. When people know it contributes to how they are recognised or progressed, engagement increases naturally.
‍
Design Processes That Work for Busy Teams
‍Good governance tools help people rather than burden them. Features such as auto-suggested categories, built-in retention controls, or automated security settings reduce the cognitive load and make compliance the easy default.

Make Benefits Visible and Acknowledge Trade-offs
‍Celebrate when governance improves outcomes, reduces risk, or saves time. At the same time, be clear when processes introduce extra steps—and explain why those steps matter.Transparency builds trust, even when the process isn’t perfect.

A Practical Way to Start

A phased approach works best:

‍Understand your current culture through conversations, surveys, and observation.
‍Identify people who influence behaviour, regardless of seniority.
‍Choose a few carefully targeted changes that will be highly visible.
‍Embed governance into existing practices, not parallel ones.
‍Reinforce progress consistently, however small.
‍Commit to the long term, recognising that cultural shifts build gradually.

Conclusion
‍
Information governance rarely struggles because of the policy itself. It struggles when the surrounding culture doesn’t support the behaviours required to implement it.

When governance aligns with professional pride, client expectations, and day-to-day routines, people adopt it willingly. When it feels disconnected from those realities, they quietly work around it.

Organisations that succeed treat culture as the foundation of governance, not a barrier to overcome. Once culture supports the goal, governance becomes a natural part of how people work—not an obligation added on top.