Designs are proposed solutions to problems. If you want anyone to be convinced that the proposed design is worth spending time and effort on, the problem has got to be real. The more authentic and pressing the problem is, the more reassuring is the ease proposed by the design.
I think that by and large, many people fall too quickly into a reactionary mode when an initiative or new idea is proposed from the top. Almost immediately I can imagine them asking questions like "How do we incorporate that?", "What needs to be done?" Important operations questions of course, but none more critical than knowing the answer to why we are doing it. Having a true understanding of the reasons why we are doing something anchors our inner purpose to our actions, ingredients necessary for self motivation and growth.
When an aide came over very recently to help us out on matters concerning mentoring, I was quite appalled by her stance that one does not need to know the reason behind why they are trying out new ideas or methods. That compliance is actually a preferred route to action.
Will such mentality help us to be more persuasive to motivate our team to adopt new ideas? Come on. Don't go the easy way. From Stephen Covey to Simon Sinek, so much has been mentioned about the critical need for inner congruence. And how are we supposed to do that if we do not ask the right questions?
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
1 comment:
Knowing the purpose of our actions and efforts gives us direction, energy and meaning to our toil.
Compliance only last as long as the threat exist, and is not sustainable.
Instructing people what to do, how to do does not raise ownership nor engagement. Giving them purpose inspires ideas and drives their actions.
Whoever proposes compliance ought to find another purpose to serve outside education, a solely people enterprise.
Post a Comment