Change. It’s that thing we all seem to have a love / hate relationship with. Most of us recognise that things need to change and yet, at the same time, almost everyone has one part of us who is at least a little bit resistant to it.
Something that I’ve discovered though is that the less change happens, the harder it is to embrace it.
If an organisation changes nothing for five years and then, suddenly, out of the blue announces a whole series of changes, then there is going to be opposition. Everyone has become comfortable with the ways things are.
And perhaps ‘comfort’ is the key word here. If we allow things to become too comfortable then inevitably people will react more fiercely to change. Why? Because it breaks them out of the their comfort zone.
I am of the school of thought that change for changes sake is a good thing. Now, of course, if there are good reasons for changing something then that is much better than having no reason. But even if there isn’t, I’m convinced that it is still necessary to make changes.
My reasoning behind this is simple. For people to more readily embrace change, change needs to be part of the organisations culture. People need to be accustomed to things changing regularly. And then, when bigger, more necessary changes need to be implemented, it will be easier to push through because you have a change expectant organisation.
What do you need to change?
Thanks for visiting Awaken. If you like what you're reading, you can stay up-to-date by email, RSS, or Twitter
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
I see what you’re saying Sam, and I sort of agree. The bit that sort of dissagrees however thinks that a point is missing here – that is the need for a core around which change revolves and evolves. The human brain is wired to work best when given structure (plans, maps, lists, directions, guides etc.). I just had a conversation this afternoon with a woman who left a church because non-stop change left her with no sense of what the church was about&therefore what (not why) her time&resources were being spent on. A loss of structure can often be found to blame for a loss of core identity as can happen with corporate mergers&demergers.
So although I agree with you that change is needed to establish a culture that better embraces changes&allows a person, group, or organisation to remain flexible in changing times, I also think that there needs to be a core group/core principle(s) around which change is encouraged (e.g. Google – 90% work, 10%play), otherwise a sense of purpose is lost and change becomes something that gets us lost&wondering where&how we got lost, rather than a useful tool that keeps us moving in the right directions.
I hear what you’re saying. Both of the organisation that I oversee (Mosaic and Vox) operate on a basis where we’re creating a culture of change and adaptability. However, that is build upon a very clear set of values – our ethos that is unchanging. So structures like you mention (plans, maps, lists, directions, guides etc) are all used in different ways but they are there to serve rather than dictate. And all of these can change. But the one thing that won’t change is our ethos, our values.
But I think we’re pretty much on the same page. The key to any successful organisation is knowing what the unchangables are. From that foundation a culture of change can and should be encouraged.