As a coach, I know I should meet people where they are.
Put myself in their shoes and empathize with what’s going on in their world.
To simply be with them as they struggle.
And after sharing with them what I’m noticing followed by some powerful questions, the hope is they will take action, and learn from it to change where they are.
This is easier to do with some than with others.
With some, there exists a growing flame of dissatisfaction with the status quo and a genuine desire to try something different. They may even become the vanguard of what John Kotter refers to as a “volunteer army” for wider change.
With others, they seem to be stuck or frozen in the past.
Comfortable and completely at ease with the past.
Unable or unwilling to see any way out from where they are now in the past.
These people remind me of an online betting commercial featuring Bert Rivers, a fictional casino player frozen in the 70’s and brought back to life over 50 years later.
Bert still dresses like the 70s.
Bert still speaks like the 70s.
And…
Bert sees everything through the lens of the 70s.
“Bert Rivers” is my metaphor for people who are frozen in the past and who resist change.
I’ve had the opportunity to work with many Bert Rivers type people. The most common types include:
- Managers who are frozen in the “Command and Control” management style inspired by late 1800s Taylorism and Scientific Management.
- Workers who are frozen in a state of learned helplessness exhibiting the 50s “Theory X” tendencies, always waiting to be told what to do next and generally unmotivated.
- Software developers who are frozen in the 70s “Waterfall” style of sequential development characterized by big discrete phases of requirements gathering, design, code and test. Unprepared to move to the next phase until the previous phase is perfect.
In the spirit of the 1980’s movie “Back to the Future”, what if we were able to travel back in time to change the past?
What would I change?
Limit Scientific Management to the work not the people
- Taylor’s work on the theory of Scientific Management was heavily data-driven based on steel manufacturing processes and workflows.
- Process and workflow variability and productivity are far easier to manage than variability in peoples’ behaviour and their productivity.
- Processes and workflows can be copied and replicated.
- Humans can’t be copied or replicated unless you believe in the premise of a recent science fiction movie I saw called “Mickey 17” 😉.
- Science tends to be systematic and logical. Human emotions are illogical and often defy reason.
Advocate for Theory Y over Theory X
- Different people are motivated by different things.
- What excites one person will bore another.
- Allocate people to work that bores them to tears and Theory X poking and prodding will rule the day.
- Allocate people to work that excites them and you won’t have to micro-manage or help them perform.
- They’ll help you. Even surprise you with their initiative and creativity.
Get readers of Royce’s paper to read beyond figure 2 on page 2
- The first line on page 2 after the infamous “Waterfall” model depicted in figure 2 reads:
“I believe in this concept, but the implementation described above [and in figure 2] is risky and invites failure.”
Winston W. Royce
- The rest of the 11 page paper goes on in Perfection Game fashion to improve the Waterfall model summarized in 5 steps:
- Program design comes first
- Document the design
- Do it twice
- Plan, control, and monitor testing
- Involve the customer
The thing I do like about Bert Rivers, as portrayed in the commercials, is his endless and insatiable curiosity to explore and make sense of the future world around him.
If the Bert Rivers type people I work with could exhibit a little of that curiosity, it would go a long way in starting to thaw their resistance.
Next Chapter Consulting 