Test equipment has to be higher quality than the item being tested.
Test software has to be more complex than the software being tested.
This is why the law of the lid by John C. Maxwell is true. You can only be evaluated by someone who is better than you, whether it be as a musician, a horseman, or a software engineer.
At some level, you have to develop a system that does not require these sorts of evaluations, because there is no one who can evaluate your best people.
This is related to the law of unintended consequences. Unintended consequences arise when a simple system is trying to control a more complex system. For example, you couldn't fly an airplane if you could only control the pitch, but not the roll, yaw, or engines. Adjusting the pitch will affect how the airplane flies, and you may think you are in control for a while, but eventually there will be behaviors that don't correlate with your attempts at control.
Another example of this is when the political system tries to control an economy. Economies are the most complex systems in existence, which is why all attempts to control them fail.
Tuesday, August 12, 2014
Why Organizational Change is so Difficult
Organizations protect the status quo. They want to improve without changing anything, which is logically inconsistent.
People exhibit this behavior as well. I want to lose weight without changing who I am. Can't I just take a pill?
If you want to lose weight, you have to become a skinnier person. If you want to run faster, you have to become a faster runner. You have to change to become who you want to be.
This is true for organizations as well. If you want to improve, what are you willing to change? What is off the table? A new CEO? A reorganization? A change in culture?
The usual approach is to not change anything, and if you have to change something, make sure it doesn't affect the decision maker. The problem is that the decision maker is more concerned about themselves than about the organization--a classic problem of agency.
People exhibit this behavior as well. I want to lose weight without changing who I am. Can't I just take a pill?
If you want to lose weight, you have to become a skinnier person. If you want to run faster, you have to become a faster runner. You have to change to become who you want to be.
This is true for organizations as well. If you want to improve, what are you willing to change? What is off the table? A new CEO? A reorganization? A change in culture?
The usual approach is to not change anything, and if you have to change something, make sure it doesn't affect the decision maker. The problem is that the decision maker is more concerned about themselves than about the organization--a classic problem of agency.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)