- Velocity - the speed at which information moves through an organization.
- Viscosity - the richness or quality of information.
- Monophonic- a single stream of information.
- Context- multiple streams of information.
Some information causes us to change, while at other times nothing happens? Why? The speed at which the information is shared can cause a decrease in quality. This causes a breakdown in what is expected and change does not occur. Likewise, if something appears too complex then the speed of change grinds to a halt as well. Frustration will likely set in and people will give up or divert attention elsewhere.
Sometimes, we share information at the right velocity and viscosity, but still nothing happens. Why? Just because we share something and believe in it still does not mean others will change just because we want them to or expect them to. We must continue to put our information "out there" in multiple streams and through other mediums. We must continue to spiral back to what our message is and give constant feedback on the progress of change.
I am sure we have all seen mandates and visions come and go throughout the years. I truly believe that some changes stick while others fail based on its velocity and viscosity, as well as the number of information streams pushed out in order to spiral back to the message. Without taking these points into consideration when developing your process for change, I would think the change may never happen. If we fail to consider a process for change, we are considering to fail in the process.
4 comments:
Ed,
We are all going thru a lot of change these days, or at least the threat of it, with the economic conditions.
I did a change workshop a few years ago in another job because we were changing so rapidly, that there were issues arising from it. Lots of people lost their jobs because they couldn't handle the stress of the changes and it ruined their productivity.
I can see how, if in a situation where you are trying to make people change, that you have to take into account the speed at which some people can handle change. It may be totally different than the speed at which they are given the chance to change.
Ed,
I think the points made on how information travels are important. This year I tried to get my staff to begin thinking on using a school wide concept of writing. The message was clear, and there was decent buy in. The fall off came in the trainings. I had it planned to be introduced and implemented over time.
The pace that the prof. Developer had to present it, and the fact that we had no one at a comfort level using it, really impacted the initiative.
I halted it almost immediately, and am planning to reintroduce this change again, next year after I have some "experts" and a better plan.
I have had the pleasure of completing an 8 day training from McRel on Marzano's School Leadership that works. It focuses a lot on change and the 21 aspects of leadership that comes into play.
A great read.
Great post Ed,
I really like the idea and language of velocity and viscosity. That said, speed and richness are two factors that I think have little meaning unless you have a learning culture and collaboration.
I've been on teams that could accept streams and streams of rich information and everyone would take it all in, work together and we could achieve amazing change in a very short time. I've also been on teams that fought change- regardles of velocity and viscosity.
I think when looking at 'the Speed of Change' the leadership and the EQ-emotional intelligence dictate how much and how rich the information can be... and whether or not meaningful change will occur.
Interesting post. My question would be how do you factor in the desire on most people's part to simply accept the status quo as an option when considering change. This despite the quality of the information put in front of them or the length to time spent researching, considering, and reporting out. I certainly see a lot of 'status quo' in my work environment.
Post a Comment