Human-less Change Fails | #87

A lot of the reasons that change fails, inside & outside technical organizations, come down to one broad statement: the people who have to make the changes are humans, and the people who want them to make the changes have not successfully taken this into account. People ask me why the change they're trying to make doesn't happen. The questions come from all levels of an org, from the very top to the very bottom. "Why won't they change?" It's often accompanied by an implicit theory. It's often aimed at me because I have had some success. I should say: being a successful change-enabler doesn't mean batting 1.000 anymore than being a successful batter does. .300 is damned good. It means one fails 70% of the time. Making sticky change looks a lot easier than it is, *especially* when the looker ignores humanness. Here's the thing: whatever brilliant new arrangement I have in mind, I am very rarely the one who's going to have to make it. (Sometimes, I'm *one* of the ones who'll have to make it, but that's not quite the same thing.) Who makes it? The humans do.

---

You can read the full transcription of this podcast over on GeePawHill.org. Any feedback, you can always tweet @GeePawHill on Twitter, or drop a voice message via the voice messages link here on Anchor. If you are interested in becoming more involved in the Change-Harvesting community, click here to learn how to join GeePaw's Camerata.

---

Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/geepawhill/message