- CHANGE THE CULTURE CHANGE THE GAME SUMMARY HOW TO
- CHANGE THE CULTURE CHANGE THE GAME SUMMARY FULL
- CHANGE THE CULTURE CHANGE THE GAME SUMMARY DOWNLOAD
We also need people prepared to debunk garbage - but some of the most hostile receptions I get at conferences is when I debunk stuff people have been using (and making money from). Gibbons: We need people “on the bridge” helping practitioners use content from academics - such as in the behavioral sciences. InfoQ: How can we move towards change practices that are both valid and useful? That is typical in behavioral science - a little tweak produces outsized results. One simple example is that changing the default setting on organ donation (when you get your license) from opt-in to opt-out roughly quadruples the number of donors! Behavioral science is highly empirical (you can measure behaviors) so ideas can be validated - it is a 21st century example of something that is valid AND useful. Let’s take an example from behavioral science. The GOOD stuff is both valid and useful - based in science, validated by evidence, and useful. Then there is material from the sciences that practitioners cannot access because it resides only in journals. There is also junk (invalid, useless - or harmful) - that too should be exposed and discarded. Similarly, psychological therapies (brief counseling, Gestalt, psychodynamic, humanistic, CBT all have their adherents… psychodynamic is pure pseudoscience, yet talking to someone works despite whatever mental model the therapist may have. However, the CONVERSATION gets the work done, not the model. They allow a conversation (say) about difference, about character, about diversity of thought, about thoughts/ values and more. They are in incredibly widespread use despite this. Gibbons: There are many many tools in the change and psychology worlds that are invalid when tested rigorously - Myers Briggs, Learning Styles, and Kubler Ross. InfoQ: In your book, you divided the change world into valid/not valid and useful/harmful. There is material unfound in ANY other book on change, such as the psychology of risk - one of my favorite quotes is, “Leaders need to understand the psychology of risk much more than the mathematics of risk.” Gibbons: It is somewhat written for specialists in change and project management, although it debunks a lot of what they practice, so has both raving enthusiasts calling it one of the best ever, AND has detractors who say, “Who the blazes is this guy to rubbish Harvard’s material?!” It has been ranked #2 on decision making, #5 on leadership, #1 on organizational change, and # 2 on change management at various times. In the book, I show why “facts don’t win arguments” and then show us what does win them.
CHANGE THE CULTURE CHANGE THE GAME SUMMARY HOW TO
Not just a “tear down” kind of book, in later chapters the book shows why behaviors don’t always align with our vision and goals, and gives practical solutions, from 21st-century research on how to achieve behavioral change. I ruthlessly debunk much of what passes for orthodoxy on change - such as “burning platforms” or “change-curves,” or learning styles. It is the first book which tries to blend the latest behavioral science research with change management and leadership theory, The Science of Organizational Change is an annoying book, taking aim at management pseudo-science, gurus, and management consultants. With my background as a scientist AND a change guy - I thought this book had to be written.
CHANGE THE CULTURE CHANGE THE GAME SUMMARY FULL
CHANGE THE CULTURE CHANGE THE GAME SUMMARY DOWNLOAD
InfoQ readers can download an extract of the book The Science of Organizational Change.
He explores how we can go from a change management to a change-agility paradigm and provides 21st-century research on behavioral science, that affects topics such as project planning, change strategy, business-agility, and change leadership in a VUCA world. In The Science of Organizational Change, Paul Gibbons challenges existing theories and tools of change management and debunks management myths.