Evolution relies on small 'permissible' changes that allow the organism to survive in the current context and eventually to show that it is even better at surviving than the unchanged organism. It is rather hard to see how traditional evolution brings about such things as the Queensland frog, which eats its own fertilised eggs. Digestive juices in the stomach are turned off; the frog survives without eating; and eventually the small baby frogs jump out of the mother's mouth. In such cases several different things must happen simultaneously for the whole operation to work.
You can imagine a giraffe's neck getting slowly longer and longer because the long-necked ones could browse on tree-tops. Permissible changes are defined as changes which have an immediate benefit, fit in with the existing system, and do not require external approval. If a librarian carries one book at a time and then chooses to carry two books, that might be a 'permissible change'.
EXTERNAL APPROVAL
This change might evolve to carrying several books and even a tray on which to place the books. Finally there may be a trolley. Even though the evolution path has been smooth, there will be a need to finance the trolley and therefore this now needs external approval.
Experts in any field are continually making a series of small changes; they take short cuts; they leave out inessential things, etc. The Japanese method of Kaizen encourages a continuous flow of small changes. In a previous article I indicated that where a bold concept change is needed, a series of small steps will not bring this about. Indeed, it may have the opposite effect by discouraging bold thinking. Right now, however, I am exploring the value of small permissible changes.
MOTIVATIONAL
Perhaps the greatest value is the motivational value. If workers are continually looking for small possible changes, then they are going to take a far more active interest in what they are doing. They are going to think about things; challenge things; and consider alternatives. There is a switch from passive acceptance to active participation. Creativity is now everyone's business.
Some small changes may only be of value to an individual. A short person may want things at a different height. A left-handed person may want things on the other side. Other small changes might simplify the process for everyone.
Small changes also have their own intrinsic value. They can speed up the work. They can reduce stress and strain. They can reduce errors. They can simplfy procedures. Even something as simple as putting a non-slip grip on a handle can have a profound effect on safety. There are, however, some obvious dangers in small permissible changes.
CHANGE FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGE
There are people who will want to show off their 'creativity' by making changes for the sake of change. This is very often the case with designers who have to show their input and imprint and only succeed in complicating a design which was perfectly satisfactory. In order to reduce this danger, there can be a requirement that the change must 'show value'. Just being novel or different is not a sufficient functional value.
IDIOSYNCRASY
This may be a perfectly valid change, but its value is only delivered to the person making that change. Suppose a person in an open plan office insists on colouring his or her space purple. This colour may suit that person, but may not have the same appeal to other people.
A clear distinction may need to be made between 'personal space' and 'shared space'. Putting something at a certain height may suit a worker on one shift, but not the worker on the next shift. The obvious solution to this dfficulty would be an easily adjustable height.
DISORGANISATION
This difficulty follows on from the previous one. If one person finds it simpler to fill in a form in a particular way, then this imposes a need on everyone dealing with that form to understand this particular method. If such changes were multiplied several times over, the disorganisation would be severe.
Where some operation has to fit in with another operation, then unilateral changes - no matter how small - can be disruptive. Where the interface between operations is limited, then joint discussion of the suggested change may be enough to sanction it. But where the interactions are diffuse, then the change may not get beyond a suggestion: as in the above example of changing the form.
EXPECTATION
If you expect traffic lights to be in a certain position and at a certain height, then changes (even if for the better) can cause confusion. Changes in the colour of traffic lights might benefit colour-blind people, but would confuse everyone else. If you expect something to be in a certain place, and it is not, then the benefits of that change for the originator may become disadvantages for others.
The difficult question, as in any sort of creativity, is how far should one be enslaved by expectations? It would be difficult to make any changes at all if expectations were an overriding factor.
Any change is going to upset expectations somewhere. In the end, it is a matter of balance between the value of the change and the 'negative' value of upset expectations.
FRIVOLITY
This is somewhat similar to 'change for the sake of change'. The change is not very important, but at the same time it is not very upsetting, either. Unless uniformity as such is a high value, then some degree of creative frivolity adds more than it subtracts.
Jeep drivers in the Philipines adorn their jeeps with rows of gleaming horns. The utility value is not high, but the 'personalisation' of the vehicle is strong.
VALUE
As for any creative change the ultimate justification is 'value'.
• What is the value of this change?
• Who benefits from the change?
• How are the benefits delivered?
• What is the cost of these benefits?
• What are the potential problems?
• Will this change be acceptable?
• How durable are the benefits?
• Who else is affected and how?
It is not difficult to construct a check-list of this sort. It is rather more difficult to go through it systematically and honestly. The really difficult cases are those where the ultimate benefits are delayed. At first there might be confusion, slow acceptance and even real drawbacks - but ultimately the benefits come through.
When Ingwe Coal in South Africa suggested an eight-day working week, followed by five days off, there was great resistance from almost everyone. Today the change is widely seen as beneficial. Workers now have time to travel to their homes. Before, travel took up most of the weekend.
Because 'permissible changes' are changes that are made within one's own decision space, the value criteria are somewhat simpler. There should be at least one dominant value. The feasibility, cost, drawbacks and effect on others can then be considered. The change should be tailored to maximise the dominant value. When there is a need to list a number of subsidiary values, then there is the suspicion that there is no dominant value.
FOCUS
The major value of small permissible changes (SPC) is that it enables someone to focus on very small matters. People are too often inclined only to think of major changes in strategy, in operations and in procedures. These are undeniably valuable, but small changes also have their own value. Such changes may save material, time and money: but, above all, they make life easier for the worker. In any organisation there are four prime values:
1. Value to the customer.
2. Value to the investor.
3. Value to the worker.
4. Value to society (environment, etc.).
Any or all of these values may be enhanced by small permissible changes.
CULTURE
People can, and do, make small changes without anyone noticing. A visible policy of encouraging small changes results in more and bigger changes. It is not just a matter of 'permitting' changes, but of actively seeking them out. Good examples should be publicised so that everyone can know about them.
Once the culture of change is in place with some identified 'champion', then the process establishes an energy of its own. It remains important to give due honour to very small changes in order to show that these are important. Changes that start small can grow bigger and bigger - even to the point where there is a basic concept change.
read all 70 gurus with one feed read all Read all media
