Click here to download a printable PDF of this cartoon.

Hermie Cartoon: Forgeddaboudit

Panel 1:

Hermie: Hey, Boss Betta… I’m afraid with that recent system change, you’ll need to forget everything I taught you from the last update…

Boss Betta: Done!

Panel 2:

Hermie: I find it impressive how quickly you can do that…

Boss Betta: Well, my boy, my grandfather was part goldfish, after all.

Sometimes We Have to Forget: The Discipline of Unlearning

In our latest Hermie the HR Hermit Crab cartoon, Hermie tells Boss Betta that because of a recent system change, he’ll need to forget everything he learned from the last update. Boss Betta instantly (to Hermie’s chagrin) instantly wipes out his memory.

It’s funny, but it also tells a painfully familiar story to anyone who works in Organizational Development (OD) or Learning & Development (L&D). We invest heavily in building knowledge. We design training carefully. We coach managers. We reinforce behaviors. We track adoption. Then the organization implements a new platform, restructures a process, or shifts direction, and suddenly we ask people to unlearn what they just mastered.

That tension deserves more attention than it usually gets.

Why Unlearning Is a Necessary Part of Organizational Change

In L&D, we often treat retention as the goal. We want learning to stick, behavior change to become enculturated, and measurable results. Kirkpatrick’s framework reminds us that real impact shows up at the level of behavior and results, not just reaction or knowledge (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). We push beyond “Did they like the training?” and ask, “Did they actually change how they work?”

But modern organizations do not operate in static environments. Systems evolve regularly, regulations shift, technology advances, market pressures accelerate, and other conditions in our open-system world pressure our workplaces to continuously change. Those things we learned to become more effective six months ago may become inefficient today. When that happens, learning does not disappear. However, it must transform. Unlearning becomes part of performance.

The Emotional Reality of Letting Go

When employees lose a familiar process, they lose confidence and security. They lose fluency. Sometimes they lose a piece of professional identity. This can cause periods similar to grief and anguish, even when the process (new or old) provides negative results.

Elisabeth Kübler-Ross described how humans respond to loss through patterns such as denial, frustration, and eventual acceptance (Kübler-Ross & Kessler, 2005). While her work focused on grief, the emotional rhythm appears regularly in organizational change. Employees resist not because of irrational fears, but because something familiar will end soon or has already ended.

William Bridges sharpened this distinction by separating change from transition (Bridges, 2009). Change occurs externally and situationally, such as with a new system, policy, or reporting line. Transition, however, describes the internal and psychological responses to change. People must let go of the old way, navigate the uncertainty of the neutral zone, and eventually embrace a new beginning.

In that neutral zone:

• Productivity often dips
• Confidence wavers
• Questions multiply. 

That phase, however, does not signify dysfunction; it shows growth and development, which can have messy outcomes for a while.

What Edgar Schein Teaches Us About Unlearning

Edgar Schein’s work on organizational culture helps explain why unlearning feels so destabilizing. Culture, he argued, operates at multiple levels:

• Artifacts: visible and tangible outward signs, symbols, and behaviors
• Espoused values: stated strategies, goals, and ways to do things
• Underlying assumptions: core unconscious beliefs (Schein, 2010). 

The deepest layer consists of taken-for-granted beliefs about how things “really” work.

When we change a system, we often disrupt more than the workflow. We challenge assumptions about authority, efficiency, control, collaboration, or risk. People may not articulate those assumptions explicitly, but they feel the disturbance.

Schein wrote that learning new things sometimes requires unlearning old assumptions. That process can trigger anxiety because it destabilizes what once felt predictable. Without psychological safety, people cling to old patterns even when those patterns no longer serve the organization. Leadership maturity matters in this case.

Leaders Are Not the Enemy

One can easily look at Boss Betta’s quick “Done!” response and interpret it as dismissive. In reality, most leaders move quickly and decisively, but not because they disregard learning. They move quickly because external pressures demand adaptation.

Leaders face:

• Competitive disruption
• Financial constraints
• Customer demands
• Regulatory changes
• Competing demands for their power

Speed becomes a survival mechanism.

Edmonson expands on Shein’s concept of psychological safety, where leaders allow some space for experimentation, speaking out, and trying new things. Teams perform better when people feel safe admitting uncertainty, asking questions, and making mistakes during learning (Edmondson, 2018). When leaders normalize the learning curve instead of shaming it, adaptation accelerates.

Strong leaders do two things simultaneously:

1. They provide direction
2. They create safety.

Retention vs. Adaptability

For those of us in L&D, repeated change can feel discouraging. You design curriculum, build reinforcement systems, measure behavior change, and develop a sense of homeostasis. The human brain loves it when we reach the status quo again. Then the organization updates everything again. It can feel like starting over.

However, perhaps we shouldn’t aim to freeze knowledge in place. Instead, we should move toward building adaptability. After all, science continuously challenges findings to discredit current assumptions and find innovative solutions or better ways to do what we do.

Kirkpatrick’s highest levels focus on behavior and results, not mere knowledge acquisition. If behavior can shift once, it can shift again. That creates and embeds capability, agility, and resilience in the workforce.

Every implementation builds more than procedural memory. Like a good workout program, it builds learning muscle. Employees who repeatedly move through endings, neutral zones, and new beginnings develop a tolerance for ambiguity. They learn how to learn. That skill outlasts any platform.

What Leaders Should Do During System Change

If you lead change, do not skip the ending. 

1. Acknowledge the effort people invested in the previous system. 
2. Name the frustration openly. 
3. Clarify the elements of what will change and what will remain constant. 
4. Create space for questions without defensiveness. 
5. Reinforce purpose and direction.

You must respect the transition the workforce feels.

The Real Lesson from This Cartoon

Boss Betta’s goldfish joke exaggerates the idea of forgetting. Organizations do not need careless erasure. They need intentional release. They need leaders who move forward without dismissing the past. They need L&D professionals who design for growth, not just retention. They need cultures that understand that stability will always present itself temporarily, which makes adaptability essential.

Sometimes we must forget what we have learned to grow. That does not invalidate the learning. It confirms that the organization is alive and evolving. In a world of constant updates, our competitive advantage may not lie in how much we retain; it may stem from how well we let go.

References

Bridges, W. (2009). Managing Transitions: Making the Most of Change.

Edmondson, A. (2018). The Fearless Organization.

Kirkpatrick, J. & Kirkpatrick, W.K. (2021). An introduction to the New World Kirkpatrick Model. Kirkpatrick Partners, LLC.

Kübler-Ross, E., & Kessler, D. (2005). On Grief and Grieving.

Schein, E. H., Schein, P. (2010). Organizational Culture and Leadership.