This post is entirely my take on a current workplace problem. It is one that is being experienced by many who are charged with the duty to introduce the use of new technologies into the workplace. None of what's in this post is new, though my way of looking at it may be new to some people. In no way am I attempting to run over the much respected studies in communities of practice (CoP), though what is posited here may support that discipline.
Why resist change?
Change has been happening since communities first began. A quick look at the development of civilisation throughout history shows that change happened in fits and starts. Historians catalogued the periods according to the recognisable practices and cultures that prevailed during these times.
There were periods when nothing seemed to alter significantly - over hundreds of years. Resisting change seems to be what people do.
Long live the King!
Many changes that did occur in communities were often brought about by a new ruling head of state, or equivalent, who introduced change by legislation. Communities did not necessarily always want change.
Even with forced legislation, communities found ways of coping, and grew to live within the new conditions. When a ruler died, it was usual that communities preferred that the successor maintained the status quo. Of course, this didn’t always happen.
Dynamic versus static
Practices that have survived for years within communities seem to be supported by a dynamic stability. Though small changes are constantly occurring within the working of these, most are subsumed with time.
Over a significant period, however, their general appearance is of no major change. Such practices are genuinely stable. Their dynamic quality is not unlike those found in other systems.
A 19th century engineer, Henry Le Châtelier, observed that systems in dynamic equilibrium tend to oppose any change brought on them from outside. Wikipedia explains it under Le Châtelier’s Principle:
"Any change in status quo prompts an opposing reaction in the responding system."
It has found application in many disciplines. Communities appear to behave similarly to the systems to which this tenet applies. Is it too implausible to assume that communities behave like other well-known systems in equilibrium?
A vehicle for change
Today we read the reports from innovators who seek change in the use of new technology in the workplace. They are often dismayed at the resistance met in their attempts to bring about change in the use of new technology by others.
This is significant considering that some of the most rapid changes in community practices, involving the use of new technology, have happened in the last few decades.
Though it is a fantastic ingredient, present day technology cannot be held solely responsible for the advent of change. It may be the seed, but it has to be spread through practice.
When this occurs, we say that the community moves with the technology. What actually happens is that the technology moves with the community. The vehicle for change may not be new technology; more likely it is the community.
Imposing new technology on a workplace community is most likely to generate some resistance. This human behaviour has become well-recognised. Belief that new technology that takes off like a rocket in one community will do likewise in the workplace, is likely to be met with disappointment.
Teenagers seek ownership
It has been found that teenagers who get into Web2.0 technology generally do so to remove themselves, in some way, from adult supervision. You could see this in the moves made by teenagers in hopping from one social networking application to another. Teenagers did this simply because they found that the application they were currently using was becoming popular among adults.
Teenagers want space to themselves – nothing new here. They also want ownership of their own space. Ownership is something that comes by default when teenagers seek a breakaway application to use in networking. They find it. It’s theirs.
Can adults be a bit like teenagers?
What if some of those characteristics survive the teenage years? What if ownership is something that adults can also appreciate when it comes to using a new technology? Ownership of the space generated by new technology could well be a community-assisting factor when it comes to introducing new technologies to the workplace.
I've found that this approach has worked with learning resources used by teachers who were involved in the initial stages of planning and designing of the resources. Teachers who had ownership of the resources through this participation, were more likely to select them for student use than those who weren't involved in resource development.
In summary
- A community may well resist adoption of new technology as a property of the equilibrium that is a state of the community - it is likely that this is a human behavioural quality.
- The vehicle of change that brings the use of new technology by a community may well be the community itself, and not the technology.
- Ownership may well be key to a community adopting a new technology – ways have to be found to ‘gift’ the space for adoption of the technology by the community.
For my last post in September, I write a tribute to the mistake. Having made several mistakes this month, I feel that I should extol the virtues of this much maligned, yet salutary indicator.
Of all the things that one does in a lifetime, the mistake deserves an accolade for being among the most unwanted deeds - deliberate or accidental. It is charged with bringing embarrassment, shame and criticism to its architect, and when recognised, can be looked upon with scorn even by young children.
Metaphors and euphemisms:
There is a mountain of expressions, metaphors and euphemisms that are used for the mistake:
blemish, bloomer, blot, blotch, blue, blunder, blur, boner, boob, boo-boo, bungle, clanger, error, fault, faux pas, flaw, folly, gaffe, gaucherie, glitch, gong, hitch, horlix, howler, impropriety, indiscretion, lapse, mark, miscue, misdeed, miss, misstep, oversight, problem, slip, solecism, spot, stain, trip, typo, woopsy, wrong - the list goes on!
It is the doom of the skydiver, headache of the politician and the ruin of investors. But it does not deserve its reputation.
The mistake is the initiator of precision and perfection. Consider the supreme champions of archery and marksmanship. Who from these groups would achieve such keen accuracy and exactness without ever having made a single mistake?
Music to the ears:
Anyone who has just learnt to play even the easiest of musical instruments will be only too aware of the self-correcting quality that the mistake imparts to the custom and practice of the learner musician.
The fine ear of the soprano singer is tuned by practice in infinitesimal degrees, through which the delicate ability of the human ear picks up disharmony and imperfection, within a beat per second, in even the highest pitched musical notes.
If we were projected back in time to the days when Yasha Heifetz first scraped a tune on his violin, or Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart plonked his opening ditty on the piano, what illuminating wonders might we hear of the first and subsequent mistakes made by these celebrated virtuosos?
Darren Roberts made a list of ten ways the mistake or its consequence, failure, can be of benefit to the learner:
Encourages lateral thinking
Gives us experience
Builds character
Encourages the strong and discourages the weak!
Makes you honest with yourself
Makes one more intangible and thick-skinned
Success too soon can give false confidence
Encourages improvement and planning
Reveals your weaknesses
Success is the attitude; failure is the lever
“The person who never made a mistake never made anything,” is a Scottish adage. It implies that the mistake is part of the fundamental nucleus that is at the core of any acquisition through learning.
It becomes the hallmark of excellence by its default.
Go easy on the exponents:
As a teacher, I go easy on those who commit mistakes. I try to take care over how I address them:
May I never misjudge in speech or print
The might of that trite word but. Far from slight,
This subtle linking word is no mere hint
Of denial, but is a halting light,
A fleeting signal found among others
Far less importunate; it makes its mark
Almost unwittingly, and being terse
Can pass unnoticed like a curt choked bark,
A harbinger of prejudice expressed.
It is the stamp that damns the accolade,
The debit to annul the funds imprest,
The contempt to denounce all plaudits made:
And if before I use it I think twice,
I could save cutting a most unkind slice.
So celebrate the mistake. It fetches music to the ears, brings home celebrated champions, gives us award-winning scholars, and it put men on the Moon. It is a lesson with a possibility worthy of an "A" (attributed to Benjamin Zander).
Art by Hannah Christine Allan Dear
Earlier this year, I wrote an elearning discussion paper on reusable learning resources for Futurelab. It was snapped up and published. Stephen Downes gave it a brief thumbs up and correctly interpreted the paper as an introduction and a history of learning resources.
But a rattled blogger put a comment against Stephen’s post that was far from complimentary to Stephen, Futurelab or me. Presumably the writer thought that the comment would get wider exposure on Stephen’s blog than on the Futurelab site. The claim was that my paper was written on the strength of “a few google searches”.
Research or copying
I suppose some papers are written on a few Google searches. Many may not necessarily cite any of the results. In my attempt, I cited a dozen or so (I'd 26 citations) of the hundreds I had on my list, including some mention of my own findings in the field.
The commenter's criticism reminded me that research of this type could come across as bogus to someone who may never have done proper research before, or had not considered the usefulness of passing on accumulated knowledge to others. Bogus or not, clearly I was being painted as a copier, and an out of date one at that. Perhaps I am.
Authors, thoughts and plagiarism
In Dave Snowden's recent post on a keynote speech he attended about innovation in companies, he asks the question: how does imitating other cases constitute innovation? Dave was obviously uneasy about the assumption that copying may be an integral part of innovation.
Sandipan Roy discussed plagiarism in the context of innovation in design, from an ethical point of view, and is still looking for a definition of it. He cites Wikipedia: "Plagiarism is the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one’s own original work". Presumably the operative word here is ‘author’, though I wonder about 'thoughts'.
A learning skill
For as much as note taking is a fundamental skill of an independent learner, it would appear that taking notes at university lectures could incur copyright issues. So far, such copying is seen as a protected infringement unless it is published, which is another form of copying.
Given the recent interest in so-called wiring of the brain and the associated metaphors, in the context of learning, how long will it take before copyright is applied to the passing on of skills and knowledge by a teacher?
Ever thought how useful it would be to be always right? Over time, one has the opportunity to make many mistakes and regrettably, a lesser number of successes. My track record is as chequered as a new weave of tartan.When I look back at the things that I got right, I feel very humble. Rare though they may be, these are the things that most helped me get to where I am today. I know! Don’t remind me!Self-esteemIt’s true for us all, though. Sometimes we do get things right – thank goodness. And serendipitous though these occurrences may appear to be, they are very important to our self-esteem.There have been many occasions when I have looked back smugly on happenings that turned out just the way I’d expected. I may even have spoken to friends and acquaintances or work-mates about how I thought things may turn out and got some opposition to my opinion at the time.But have you ever noticed how unpopular you can be when, through the passage of time, you are proved right and you crow, “I told you so”?
People’s reactions can be such a put down to a know-it-all who’s right. Even if it’s just the once. The fact is, people rarely want to hear that time honoured assertion.
No win situationIt’s been my experience with this that’s taught me to button up when these superior occasions arise. I find it difficult. Often, my attitude gives the game away, even if I don’t say a word. I get quite petulant. I feel it’s simply not fair - I just can’t win.Dale Carnegie eloquently explains the social consequences of being proved right and saying so. It’s not exactly how to win friends and influence people - hence the title of his book, I guess.So how does one cover for this? Is the answer to be always wrong? That could be just as problematic. In any case, the chances of being always wrong are probably similar to the chances of being always right. It’s never as consistent as you might like it to be.
But on the occasions when I just know I’m going to be proved right and I say as much, the words are often out before I have a chance to consider the long-term consequences of my utterances. Short of getting a tonguectomy, what is there that a bear of little brain can do?
A plea for help
I’ve just set up a private blog on Blogger with about 20 author invitees. Some of my invitees are having real problems getting in. I’ve checked all their email addresses – twice now. All valid and squeaky clean.
There are 12 people who can get in (one’s a dummy email/password I created for myself) and at least 4 people who cannot get their valid Google account IDs to permit them access – doh! It's really frustrating!
A couple more found that their already-created Google accounts worked but the new ones with their work email address did not.
Lack of Feed
Another thing I notice is that I can’t subscribe to the new blog.
At first I thought that this was because of the settings, but then when I checked, none of them mentioned anything about RSS Feed except for the one on Blog Feeds.
I have Allow Blog Feeds set to FULL, and the Permissions set to Only Blog Authors (all my invitees are invited as blog authors).
I've checked out the Help on Blogger and haven't been successful at finding anything relevant to my troubled invitees who have been very patient with me.
I’m setting this blog up for the start of next term (in just over 2 weeks time here in NZ) and I hoped to get all invitees started by the end of this term. I'd really like it to happen.
So if you have any suggestions, I’d be really grateful to hear from you.
Posts
