{"id":21496,"date":"2021-01-09T02:44:00","date_gmt":"2021-01-09T06:44:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.shortform.com\/blog\/?p=21496"},"modified":"2021-01-11T18:28:58","modified_gmt":"2021-01-11T22:28:58","slug":"implementing-change","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.shortform.com\/blog\/implementing-change\/","title":{"rendered":"Implementing Change and Adapting to Randomness"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Why is implementing change<\/a> important? How can you get better at implementing change?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Implementing change is an important part of building a successful organization, according to Pixar co-founder<\/a> Ed Catmull. Things can’t always stay the same and you have to adapt to the randomness or pursue changes to stay successful.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Read more about implementing change and what Ed Catmull says about it in his book Creativity, Inc.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Implementing Change: Why It Matters<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Another of Catmull\u2019s keys to building a successful organization is implementing change, accept randomness<\/a>, and find your blind spots. <\/strong>Many creative organizations<\/a> fall into the trap of holding onto systems that worked in the past without understanding why<\/em> they worked. They try to force a process onto a problem or concept, even if that process isn\u2019t the most effective for the project at hand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For example, when Pixar started work on Toy Story 2<\/em>, they believed the process they developed on Toy Story<\/em> would allow new directors to succeed at the helm of the project. What they failed to recognize was that the reason Toy Story <\/em>was successful wasn\u2019t because of the \u201cprocess.\u201d It was because of the people. Without the right people<\/a>, the \u201cprocess\u201d was hollow and almost led Pixar to its demise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Many people believe, \u201cif it ain\u2019t broke, don\u2019t fix it,\u201d meaning that processes that have worked in the past don\u2019t need to be changed. This can be a dangerous belief, especially in the long term. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Change is necessary. <\/strong>The world is changing all of the time, and you have to adapt accordingly. Just because a process has \u201cworked before\u201d doesn\u2019t mean it\u2019s the best fit for new issues or projects. You have to introduce new ideas to meet the ever-changing needs of your organization. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

For example, Catmull wasn\u2019t a fan of Pixar making sequels. He built Pixar on the foundation that new and original projects were the most important thing to the organization and viewed sequels as \u201ccreative bankruptcy.\u201d However, over time, Catmull changed his view on the importance of sequels. They usually produced high box office returns and freed up the company to use their funds towards new and experimental projects. Because of this, Catmull had the studio produce a sequel every other year to ensure they had the constant income to experiment with new concepts without putting the company at risk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This isn\u2019t to say that you have to make changes for the sake of making changes. There are reasons to keep processes in place, especially when they\u2019ve been created to combat specific issues. However, too many well-intentioned rules and restrictions can kill a creative process<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Alleviating the Fear of Change<\/strong> to Get Support for Implementing Change<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

People are afraid of enacting change because change is often associated with a \u201cbroken\u201d or \u201cineffective\u201d process or product. People don\u2019t want to look incompetent and will often try to lobby for their work, even if that work isn\u2019t effective. This fear can cripple your team and make them unwilling to adapt.<\/strong> If unaddressed, this could have disastrous consequences. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

For example, as the Silicon Valley computer race continued through the \u201890s and 2000s, companies that were willing to change their focus according to new developments in technology succeeded. However, companies such as Silicon Graphics tried to continue selling large, expensive computers instead of investing in more economical models. While this kept them afloat in the short term, their aversion to change killed them in the end.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The following are a few tips to help you alleviate the fear of change:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n