Resistance-to-change is an oft quoted excuse for improvement torpor. The implied sub-message is more like “We would love to change but They are resisting“.
Notice the Us-and-Them language. This is the observable evidence of an “We‘re OK and They’re Not OK” belief. And in reality it is this unstated belief and the resulting self-justifying behaviour that is an effective barrier to systemic improvement.
This Us-and-Them language generates cultural friction, erodes trust and erects silos that are effective barriers to the flow of information, of innovation and of learning. And the inevitable reactive solutions to this Us-versus-Them friction create self-amplifying positive feedback loops that ensure the counter-productive behaviour is sustained.
One tangible manifestation are DRATs: Delusional Ratios and Arbitrary Targets.
So when a plausible, rational and well-evidenced candidate for an alternative approach is discovered then it is a reasonable reaction to grab it and to desperately spray the ‘magic pixie dust’ at everything.
This a recipe for disappointment: because there is no such thing as ‘improvement magic pixie dust’.
The more uncomfortable reality is that the ‘magic’ is the result of a long period of investment in learning and the associated hard work in practising and polishing the techniques and tools.
It may look like magic but is isn’t. That is an illusion.
And some self-styled ‘magicians’ choose to keep their hard-won skills secret … because by sharing them know that they will lose their ‘magic powers’ in a flash of ‘blindingly obvious in hindsight’.
And so the chronic cycle of despair-hope-anger-and-disappointment continues.
System-wide improvement in safety, flow, quality and productivity requires that the benefits of synergism overcome the benefits of antagonism. This requires two changes to the current hope-and-despair paradigm. Both are necessary and neither are sufficient alone.
1) The ‘wizards’ (i.e. magic folk) share their secrets.
2) The ‘muggles’ (i.e. non-magic folk) invest the time and effort in learning ‘how-to-do-it’.
The transition to this awareness is uncomfortable so it needs to be managed pro-actively … by being open about the risk … and how to mitigate it.
That is what experienced Practitioners of Improvement Science (and ISP) will do. Be open about the challenged ahead.
And those who desperately want the significant and sustained SFQP improvements; and an end to the chronic chaos; and an end to the gaming; and an end to the hope-and-despair cycle …. just need to choose. Choose to invest and learn the ‘how to’ and be part of the future … or choose to be part of the past.
Improvement science is simple … but it is not intuitively obvious … and so it is not easy to learn.
If it were we would be all doing it.
And it is the behaviour of a wise leader of change to set realistic and mature expectations of the challenges that come with a transition to system-wide improvement.
That is demonstrating the OK-OK behaviour needed for synergy to grow.