I like the general ideas of the Change Journey. It resonates. The map is a pretty idea.
When reflecting this to my experiences with customers, I feel that there is still quite a gap to be bridged from the abstract concepts and spaces, to practical talks with the team. Of course I understand that this is work in progress, and you are opening the Ning to build this together.
One of the first things that occurred to me, is that when I am new in town, I like to go to a tourist office: a place where they can show me the map of the town, offer suggestions of where to start my visit (based on my questions and interests), maybe offer a guided tour,... They will talk me through the map, tell me about special interesting exhibitions, etc...
Similarly you might include a tourist office on your map too. It would be the natural place to start the exploration of the change. I often start with one person who is my client (or a team of two or three); but of course this is too shallow to carry the whole change. So questions there might include:
- who should join the 'design team', 'change team', 'guiding coalition', 'program board', 'project team' or whatever name you want to give to this group?
- what is the change we want to see happening, what is the focus?
- how will we know we have reached our destination?
Look forward to hearing / reading other contributions!
I agree with this. I'm trained as a forester so I want aerial photos - google photos for the overview. I look for the hills, the vegetation, and the waterflow. The city flows mesh onto the topography. Most maps only show the streets, big rivers, and tourist-attractor places. Overlaying the different kinds of info is like looking down through the branches of a fir tree - grows complexity. Looking at the fir tree from the side shows the individual branches and the whorls of branches.
Very, very good remarks, indeed! For some reasons, we decided to make a city map - but nothing speaks against that in the future there will be an outdoor version. With regards to increasing complexity, I am not sure whether I want that, at least for the moment. This thing has it's own complexity by the sheer number of 23 places - think of the potential permutations. In fact, we started much more complex but I would like to maintain a simple meta model to show the complexity of the task to managers. But then again, maybe in the future we can have simple, and complex versions.
Katia, reflecting on your thoughts: I think the tourist office is a great idea. In fact the person who introduces the Map to teams (the consultant or internal change champion or whoever) will be a kind oof a tour guide but we haven't yet spelled out this designation.
Offer to where to start the journey: this is a definite no go zone, for the moment. Because the basic idea for this approach is that teams/organizations must find out themselves which places are attractive or compelling. Otherwise we go back to a fixed change model (there are many of those around).
Guided tour sounds much better - all the 23 places can be introduced in like what, 10-15 minutes?
In respect of what is missing, I'd suggest a Genius Loci / sweat lodge on the outskirts of the map where one can go and reflect on the map / system design from the outside.. This is a liminal space / ritual where the order, metaphors and language used on the map can be deconstructed and can be freely questioned.
Hi Steve, thanks for the suggestion. I am collecting ideas. Can you be a bit more specific? What other than such a discussion space would you like to see? Any more specific ideas? What form shoudl it have? You can do a lot of things with Ning platforms - basically everything, but some things need more programming skills than I have.
I read your message again, and in fact you might not have referred to this Ning platform but to the Map itself. Yes, we have such a place on the Map - it is the Agora (see my blog post from yesterday). It is the place where innovation happens. I have planned to reveal the Agora as the last place to keep the suspense up. But I am not sure whether the way we have constructed it is really from outside. Will continue thinking about it.
1) Overview: There are two things: the concept of the journey as a generic concept (uncertainty, complexity, dialogue etc.). Second, there is the Map as the central tool for facilitating change journeys. Do you have a suggestion (looking at what is already there) how we could improve the usability and clarity?
2) There are 23 tools, so if I reveal one per week, it will take half a year. So, my idea was to reveal 3-5 per week, so that we are through in like 2 months. Does that make sense? Discussions could be in parallel. Maybe too quick? I understand that this is not the best approach for a coordinated dialogue
When something crunches, when the firemen arrive, they use "recognition primed decisions" RPD. Based on their training and experience. Managers/commanders might call it using "war stories." Experienced entrepreneurs carry success patterns in their heads that help future attempts. I think that myths are a more general, social-community based, set of stories that enabled people to do better in the past. Trickster stories are stories for evoking change. Hero's journey myth stories do the same. The early quantum mechanics people studied ancient Chinese philosophy (taoism/daoism - as shown in the Tao of Physics). I'm wondering about meshing the early tourist view, my war stories, into the journey and its principles.
In terms of what is missing, I'd also suggest a discussion around organisation design / theory and especially approaches to the design of complex, self-sustaining systems that go beyond the traditional pyramid-shaped hierarchy. Also the techniques, language, models and metaphors used by leadership to engage and shift complex realities.