Hello. Thanks for stopping by. If you would like to learn more about personal and organizational change, why not subscribe to the RSS feed. Or, if you're old school, Bookmark This Site

In my original Sliding Scales post I introduced the concepts of creative destruction and creative recombination. These terms come from Eric Abrahamson’s book Change Without Pain.

Creative destruction means that the change is huge, sweeping, and attempts to be a fresh start. At an organizational level a company might implement creative destruction by selling off a division or completely relocating operations to a new state. At a personal level, leaving the country and completely re-designing your lifestyle certainly qualifies as an 8 or 9.

Creative recombination, on the other hand, attempts to use systems and structures that are already in place to accomplish a new purpose. The changes are more gradual and less disruptive than creatively destructive change. Organizational creative recombination could include establishing cross-functional teams to pollinate ideas through their networks. Personal creative recombination could be as minor as using existing jobs skills in a new position.

Now that the definitions are set, how do we choose what setting on the 1-10 scale to employ? Here are 3 questions to ask:

Is there anything to recombine?
In a genuinely corrupt, degraded, or obsolete system, the raw materials needed for recombination might not be available. The less there is to work with and recombine, the more a situation calls for destruction and rebuilding. On a physical level I am reminded of a building I drive by everyday. Several months ago this old factory building was in the process of being renovated into housing. Sadly the building caught fire and burnt beyond the point of salvage. Now it is sitting, decaying and waiting to be bulldozed.

The same conditions can arise in an individual life or in an organization. In cities and departments that are rife with corruption, voters have been known the “throw the bums out” in hope of cleansing the system and starting again. Personal relationships can become so toxic that there is no reasonably choice other than moving on.

How much resistance is there to change?
In his book, Abrahamson believes that companies that have become change avoiders can benefit from large scale creative destruction. It may seem counterintuitive to recommend the most drastic change to those who resist it the most, but overwhelming the resistance may be the only way to make change take root. Attempting to recombine elements when those elements are digging in their heels to stop all progress is setting yourself up for failure.

Addicts provide a good example of people who vehemently resist change. In many cases of addiction, only a complete and sudden withdrawal - going “cold turkey” - can help the addict break the habit. On the other extreme, people interested in personal development often find that they can’t integrate sweeping change all at once. Rather, they slowly incorporate new habits and priorities into the framework of their existing lives. Over time, the change can be quite dramatic, but it is a very gradual process.

How fast is the change needed?
The existence of a genuine crisis plays a role here as well. Creative recombination takes time to make an impact. Destruction and reconstruction can be much quicker. In a company that is threatened by an agile and powerful new competitor, it may be necessary to completely reconfigure how business is done.

Because creative destruction can be difficult and painful, it shouldn’t be used lightly. Asking individuals or organizations to endure large scale change time and time again almost inevitably results in change fatigue. This fatigue will lead to resistance to change, which will necessitate even more radical changes.

Do you see the vicious circle here?

Change when needed, but keep enough stability so that the system doesn’t fall apart.

In the next post, I’ll conclude this series and provide an overview of the change process. If you have any experience with creative destruction or creative recombination, please share your stories in the comments.

After making the decision to change, the next step in the Sliding Scales of Change process is to decide the speed at which to implement the change. For some changes, “fast, like a Band-Aid!” is the most appropriate. At other times, slow and steady will indeed win the race. Here are some criteria for choosing a pace for your change.

Is it a Crisis?
In a time of true crisis, such as a natural disaster, hostile takeover attempt, or serious health problem, rapid change may be the only viable option. The caveat here is that many situations can be perceived as a crisis when they are actually long-term issues that may have just boiled to the surface. In American society, especially, we tend to declare issues a “crisis” to try to catalyze rapid change. When this technique is used too often, people can develop change fatigue and become resistant to all types of change.

Magnitude of Change
Generally, the more complex a change is, the more time it will take to implement effectively. This is quite obvious on an organizational level. Complex software implementations or company wide reorganizations can take years to implement. A smaller change, such as cross-training within departments might be feasible on a very rapid schedule.

How Much Previous Change
For people or organizations that have had to incorporate many changes in the recent past, change fatigue might have set in. If that is the case, a slower pace may be necessary. In a department that has been reorganized to report to a different division head, then been cross-trained on new jobs, then had to adapt to a new ERM system all within a year or two, even a small change might be too much to integrate quickly. Time, training, and mental preparation all become more necessary as complexity and overload increase.

Resistance to Change
The more resistant a person or organization is to change, the longer it will take to change successfully. Some organizations have a culture of change and can switch tactics and strategies very quickly with very little pain. On the surface, it seems like age and openness to change are negatively correlated. In general, the older we get as individuals or as work teams, the less adaptable we are. This means that any change process will take longer, cause more pain, and have less chance for a successful outcome. Adjusting the pace to make the process as easy as possible will increase the chances for success.

What Feels Right
Regardless of all of the other considerations involved, sometimes a certain pace of change just feels right. As an example, I have an uncle who smoked for at least 20 years. He decided one day that he wanted to quit smoking - and he did right then. He claims to this day that he has only had one physical craving for a cigarette since then, when he was training a new semi-truck driver in a Chicago snowstorm!

A Personal Example
When I was in high school, I decided that I wanted to become a vegetarian. I wasn’t conceiving of this as a 30-day-trial or other temporary experiment. I wanted to stop eating meat immediately and never eat meat again. One day I just decided to quit eating meat.

That lasted about 3 days.

I realized that becoming a vegetarian was too large of a change for me to handle all at once. To be successful, I needed to educate myself about nutrition and food preparation issues; speak to my family about my decision; develop strategies for dining out in the American Midwest; and explain to my grandmother that I would not die immediately by skipping the pot roast at dinner.

After considering all of this, I decided to transition to vegetarianism in a very gradual way, by giving up one type of meat each year. Year 1 was pork, Year 2 was beef, Year 3 was chicken/turkey. Eventually I had eliminated and found substitutes for all the types of meat from my old diet. In my case, a setting of about 2 on the sliding scale was the most effective.

I’m happy to say that my post Sliding Scales of Change was featured in this week’s Personal Development Carnival.

As always, there were many good entries. I especially enjoyed You Can’t Help Others Without Helping Yourself at I’m Happy Fish.  My day job involves working with not-for-profit organizations. We always try to emphasize that volunteering is as much a benefit for the volunteer as for the recipient. Go out and help someone today and see if you feel better!

When I introduced the concept of Sliding Scales of Change, I explained that the first step in any change process is to decide whether to change the situation at all. This is often harder than it seems. Humans are analytical creatures, constantly weighing possibilities against each other. This can leave us stuck in “analysis paralysis” waiting for the fact or argument that will finally make the “right” choice clear.

Sitting at 5
Going back to the concept of a 1 to 10 scale, if you were unable to decide whether to Change or Accept It As It Is (and it doesn’t matter what “It” is - if you know what I mean you would be at a 5. Regardless of what the song says, to me 5 is the Loneliest Number. I hate being stuck with two legitimate choices and no way of figuring out what I want to do. If the situation and choices are large enough - such as deciding to end or continue a relationship, or to sell or keep the business - it can feel like your entire life is on hold. Fortunately, there are some techniques for getting past this.

Any Decision Can Be the Right Decision
When deciding between two equally legitimate choices, we tend to over magnify the importance of the choice. We have mental dialogues such as, “I have to choose the right career or my life will be ruined!” or “If I don’t decide who to go on a date with I will never find love!” We all need to get over ourselves right now. Very few decisions will ruin your chances for happiness for the rest of your life and even fewer are life and death.

The book Goal Free Living makes the argument that “No matter what decision you make, it is the right decision, if you truly commit to it and never look back.” I especially like this post from the author Stephen Shapiro that recommends making major life decisions using Rock, Paper, Scissors.

Be a 1 or Be a 10
The worst choice we can make in any situation is to Not Choose. Indecision is a like a weight that we carry around and it slows down our progress. Whatever tool you find most helpful in making a decision, use it and get as close to a 1 or a 10 as possible. Don’t look back, don’t second guess and trust that any path is going to lead you to an interesting place.