From stress response to regulation: the vagus nerve in organisations

By: Koen Deblonde

#Inspiration  

A few years ago, I started training in Somatic Experiencing®. What attracted me was not only working with trauma, but above all the question: what happens in a person when tension builds up? What causes someone to suddenly react differently than they would like to? Why do nuance and empathy disappear precisely when things get tense? What is the effect of chronic stress on the body?

During that training, I learned to listen to the body. Not as a symptom, but as a signpost. I learned to notice tension without immediately wanting to resolve it. I learned to see how the nervous system constantly assesses whether a situation is safe enough to remain present, or whether protection is needed.

What struck me along the way was how universal these mechanisms are. Not only in therapy, but also in meeting rooms. Not only in trauma, but also in feedback conversations. Not only in individual processes, but also in teams. My curiosity shifted. What if much of what we call “resistance”, “difficult behaviour” or “cultural problems” are in fact signals from a nervous system seeking protection? What if safety is not a soft theme, but a biological prerequisite for thinking, learning and collaborating?

Since then, I have delved deeper into the neurobiology of stress, the functioning of the vagus nerve, Stephen Porges' polyvagal theory and David Rock's SCARF model. What began as a personal quest became a professional conviction: if you want to understand collaboration, you have to understand how the nervous system works.

The vagus nerve: not a reset button, but a communication system

Social media often talks about “resetting” the vagus nerve. That sounds hopeful and achievable, but neurobiologically, that image is incorrect. The vagus nerve is not a button that you can turn on or off. It is the tenth cranial nerve and an essential part of the parasympathetic nervous system. It connects the brain stem to the heart, lungs and digestive organs and plays a central role in regulation.

Importantly, approximately eighty percent of vagal fibres are afferent: they send information from the body to the brain. This means that the brain is constantly informed about the state of the body, heart rate, breathing, muscle tension and energy levels. The brain therefore responds not only to what we think, but above all to what the body experiences. 

When the context is perceived as safe enough, the vagus nerve supports a state of recovery, social engagement and flexibility. When a threat is perceived, the autonomic nervous system shifts towards protection. This is not a mistake, but an evolutionary mechanism that helps us survive.

What we often see as personal failure, such as ‘I can't relax’ or ‘I react too strongly,’ is usually not a weakness, but rather a nervous system that has learned to be vigilant. The system is trying to protect you. Regulation does not come about by forcing yourself to calm down, but by repeatedly experiencing that you are safe, in your environment and in your relationships with others. 

What happens to thinking under pressure?

Safety is often approached psychologically as a feeling. Neurobiologically, it is much more concrete. Safety means that the neocortex, and in particular the prefrontal cortex, remains available. The prefrontal cortex is involved in discernment, perspective-taking, empathy, impulse control, planning, moral reasoning, integration of emotion and cognition, and access to contextual memory. It is the part of the brain that enables nuance. 

Under stress, however, activity shifts to more primary survival networks. Research by Arnsten (2009), among others, shows that stress hormones temporarily suppress the functioning of the prefrontal cortex. The result is recognisable: thinking narrows, black-and-white reasoning increases, memory becomes less accessible, and listening becomes more difficult. This explains why smart, experienced professionals sometimes cannot articulate what they normally know perfectly well when under pressure. It is not that the knowledge has disappeared, but that the system temporarily prioritises survival over reflection.

In organisations, this means that analysis, persuasion or correction have little effect when safety is lacking. What is needed first is regulation.

The polyvagal theory: understanding a person's state

Stephen Porges' polyvagal theory provides a functional framework for understanding these shifts. It describes three main states in which the autonomic nervous system can find itself.

• In the ventral vagal state, social engagement is possible. People make eye contact, their voices are warm and modular, they are curious and capable of nuance. Here, the neocortex is easily accessible. Differences of opinion do not have to be threatening.
• In sympathetic activation, the system is mobilised. The pace increases, breathing quickens, judgements become sharper. This energy is not negative; it is necessary for action, decision-making and change. We need sympathetic energy to get moving. Regulation determines whether that energy becomes constructive or destructive. When it remains connected to ventral engagement, decisiveness with contact arises. When that connection is lost, the same energy can escalate into forcing, fighting or avoidance.
• In dorsal withdrawal, the system slows down considerably. Energy drops, initiative disappears, engagement diminishes. This is not a lack of motivation, but a protective mechanism when action is perceived as pointless or overwhelming.

It is important to note that people rarely exist in a single pure state. We often see combinations: powerful mobilisation with connection (ventral + sympathetic), or calm reflection with slight withdrawal (ventral + dorsal). Problems arise when protection becomes detached from connection. Regulation therefore does not mean remaining permanently in one “good” state. It means flexibility and the ability to move without losing contact with yourself or the other person.

SCARF: social safety as a biological necessity

David Rock translated these neurobiological insights into organisations with the SCARF model. The brain constantly scans five social domains: status, security, autonomy, relatedness and fairness. When one of these domains is threatened, the brain activates threat networks.

Feedback often affects status. Change undermines security and autonomy. Unclear decision-making affects fairness. Social exclusion affects connectedness. These reactions are not purely emotional; they are neurologically measurable. Psychological safety, as described by Amy Edmondson, is therefore not a non-committal atmosphere. It is the context in which the nervous system experiences sufficient safety to enable thinking, learning and speaking. 

What leaders can do in concrete terms

Leaders influence the regulation of a system, often without realising it. Their pace, tone and predictability have a co-regulating or disruptive effect.

Regulatory leadership means remaining present under pressure. It means slowing down when tension rises. It means leaving status intact when making corrections. It means identifying what is certain and what is still open in order to restore certainty. It means respecting autonomy within clear frameworks. It means explaining decisions in order to support fairness. And above all, it means remaining present when things get tough, rather than pushing tension away or accelerating it. Regulation here is not a technique, but a state of being. Under pressure, leadership becomes visible in how someone handles tension.

What employees can do

Employees also have influence. They cannot “regulate” their manager in the strict sense of the word; ultimately, everyone is responsible for their own nervous system. However, they can contribute to a safer context. They can do this by acknowledging tension without assigning blame, by asking for clarification when uncertain, by making intentions explicit to reduce status threats, or by emphasising connection before addressing the content. Sometimes regulation also means setting boundaries or seeking support outside of direct contact. Regulation is not submission. It is consciously dealing with what you can and cannot bear. 

Regulation as a collective practice

We constantly borrow each other's nervous systems. In teams, pace, uncertainty and emotional tone are quickly shared. That is why regulation is not just an individual skill, but a relational and systemic process.

When safety increases, we see thinking return, creativity emerge, conflicts become more productive and responsibility grow. Not because people try harder, but because their system is available again. Safety is not comfort. It is the biological basis of mature cooperation.

Discussing safety and regulation?

In recent years, I have become increasingly interested in what happens when pressure increases, in the body, in thinking and in interactions between people. What I see in teams and among leaders is that many collaboration issues are not behavioural problems, but regulatory issues. When tension rises, the system shifts. Thinking narrows, pace increases or energy drops. And that is precisely where leadership becomes visible.

In my work, I work with leaders and teams to investigate what happens in their context: where protection takes over, where safety is under pressure, and how regulation can be supported again. Not to “fix” people. But to create conditions in which thinking, learning and mature collaboration become possible again.