Unnecessary change and mediocrity

One of the pre-conditions for excellence in an activity is that the requirements of the activity remain relatively stable.

For instance, consider professional tennis. The sizes of the racquets, the balls, the courts, the height of the nets and the rules of the game remain relatively unchanged over time. And as a result, the players are able to become skilled in tennis as an activity.

Now suppose instead that the powers-that-be made random changes to the rules and the other parameters of the game at random intervals - what level of professionalism and excellence would result?

I think the answer is clear. We wouldn't end up with people who were excellent at the activity per se; we would end up with people who could rapidly adjust to the rule changes but whose skill set was aimed at broad adjustments to keep their heads above water rather than become good at it. Because why try to be good at something that may well be superseded tomorrow?

What this means is that making unnecessary changes to the way work is done is a recipe for mediocrity. Adjusting to changes takes energy away from actually getting the work done. And the more frequently changes are made the greater the uncertainty that is created among those doing the work as to whether they are doing it in the expected way. Have they missed one of the changes that they were supposed to implement? It may be hard to tell. Especially if the changes are announced in different ways, from different authorised voices within the organisation, or if multiple announced changes are in conflict.

It can get really confusing if what was wrong last week is right this week and vice versa. And it can get even more confusing if a change is announced and then there are subsequent changes to the change when flaws in it become apparent, and then changes to the changes to the changes when further flaws are revealed. Depending on the frequency of changes, systems may have trouble keeping up and workers may not just have to remember the change but also remember the latest system workaround as well.

The take home lessons from this are:

• If you want excellence, only change what absolutely needs changing
• If you want clarity, only announce changes through a single channel and get them right the first time.

And what do you need to implement these lessons?

 Three simple things: analysis, foresight and planning. Things that are simple, but hard to do well and which it seems are in very short supply.