Blog

H x V x F > R

by Jamie Flinchbaugh on 01-15-10

This is the first video in our Cultural Transformation series.

When trying to lead cultural transformation in any organization, whether tied to lean or not, there is no greater lever than the words, actions, and behaviors of the leader. In this video, we describe 3 key elements that you must be generating.

H is for a Hatred of current reality. Whether it’s the results or just the waste, you want to hate enough that it compels action. If you don’t like the word hatred, try intolerance.

V is for a Vision of the ideal state. You need to know where you are headed.

And F is for the courage to take the First steps of action.

All 3 of those elements must be greater than R, which is the Resistance to change in the organization.

Check out the video for more, and please share your experiences in the comments below.

If you’d like to learn more from our Cultural Transformation series and other content, put your email in the box to the right to have the content delivered to you for free.

Comments

  • Great post and makes complete sense.

    There is one other factor that might come into play, and perhaps it’s actually part of V (Vision). I’ll call it S for Salesmanship. The leadership needs to be able to sell the vision to a critical mass of the people in the organization or I believe it will fail. I’ve seen this in action. A person leading the band with a vision, but no one was following…

    Mark Welch January 15, 2010 at 10:13 am
  • Great post and makes complete sense.

    There is one other factor that might come into play, and perhaps it’s actually part of V (Vision). I’ll call it S for Salesmanship. The leadership needs to be able to sell the vision to a critical mass of the people in the organization or I believe it will fail. I’ve seen this in action. A person leading the band with a vision, but no one was following…

    Mark Welch January 15, 2010 at 10:13 am
  • Great post and makes complete sense.

    There is one other factor that might come into play, and perhaps it’s actually part of V (Vision). I’ll call it S for Salesmanship. The leadership needs to be able to sell the vision to a critical mass of the people in the organization or I believe it will fail. I’ve seen this in action. A person leading the band with a vision, but no one was following…

    Mark Welch January 15, 2010 at 10:13 am
  • Mark, I agree that’s very important. As far as this is concerned, it is part part of the vision. A vision self-contained in your own head is not worth much to the organization.

    In our Leading Lean course, we teach many methods for doing the kind of selling that a leader or change agent must do.

    Jamie Flinchbaugh January 15, 2010 at 11:09 am
  • Mark, I agree that’s very important. As far as this is concerned, it is part part of the vision. A vision self-contained in your own head is not worth much to the organization.

    In our Leading Lean course, we teach many methods for doing the kind of selling that a leader or change agent must do.

    Jamie Flinchbaugh January 15, 2010 at 11:09 am
  • Mark, I agree that’s very important. As far as this is concerned, it is part part of the vision. A vision self-contained in your own head is not worth much to the organization.

    In our Leading Lean course, we teach many methods for doing the kind of selling that a leader or change agent must do.

    Jamie Flinchbaugh January 15, 2010 at 11:09 am
  • Hi Jamie

    I’ve shared your formulas with clients and they typically question the use of the term “hatred”. I’ve usually allowed “strong dissatisfaction” as a substitute. What’s your thought on this?

    Jon Miller January 15, 2010 at 1:19 pm
  • Hi Jamie

    I’ve shared your formulas with clients and they typically question the use of the term “hatred”. I’ve usually allowed “strong dissatisfaction” as a substitute. What’s your thought on this?

    Jon Miller January 15, 2010 at 1:19 pm
  • Hi Jamie

    I’ve shared your formulas with clients and they typically question the use of the term “hatred”. I’ve usually allowed “strong dissatisfaction” as a substitute. What’s your thought on this?

    Jon Miller January 15, 2010 at 1:19 pm
  • Great question Jon. First, the reason we use hatred instead of dissatisfaction is that there is just overwhelming evidence that if people are just dissatisfied with something, they take no action. They need something stronger. That being said, I understand the reaction to the word hatred and offer these opinions:

    1. I think “intolerance” can be a suitable and reasonable substitute word. You can have a “hatred for a waste” or an “intolerance for waste” and I think you end up with the same proper behavior of taking action.

    2. I think “strong dissatisfaction” can work sometimes, but I think it depends on whether you get the emotional response willing to step out of the comfort zone. I would think this might vary from one organization’s culture to another.

    3. One reason people don’t like the word is that it makes them uncomfortable. My response to that: good. That’s the point. We were too comfortable with waste, too comfortable with current reality. We want to stretch people. So if people react to it, I think that is a good and healthy thing, even if they don’t use the word themselves.

    I hope that helps, and thanks for sharing.

    Jamie Flinchbaugh January 15, 2010 at 1:51 pm
  • Great question Jon. First, the reason we use hatred instead of dissatisfaction is that there is just overwhelming evidence that if people are just dissatisfied with something, they take no action. They need something stronger. That being said, I understand the reaction to the word hatred and offer these opinions:

    1. I think “intolerance” can be a suitable and reasonable substitute word. You can have a “hatred for a waste” or an “intolerance for waste” and I think you end up with the same proper behavior of taking action.

    2. I think “strong dissatisfaction” can work sometimes, but I think it depends on whether you get the emotional response willing to step out of the comfort zone. I would think this might vary from one organization’s culture to another.

    3. One reason people don’t like the word is that it makes them uncomfortable. My response to that: good. That’s the point. We were too comfortable with waste, too comfortable with current reality. We want to stretch people. So if people react to it, I think that is a good and healthy thing, even if they don’t use the word themselves.

    I hope that helps, and thanks for sharing.

    Jamie Flinchbaugh January 15, 2010 at 1:51 pm
  • Great question Jon. First, the reason we use hatred instead of dissatisfaction is that there is just overwhelming evidence that if people are just dissatisfied with something, they take no action. They need something stronger. That being said, I understand the reaction to the word hatred and offer these opinions:

    1. I think “intolerance” can be a suitable and reasonable substitute word. You can have a “hatred for a waste” or an “intolerance for waste” and I think you end up with the same proper behavior of taking action.

    2. I think “strong dissatisfaction” can work sometimes, but I think it depends on whether you get the emotional response willing to step out of the comfort zone. I would think this might vary from one organization’s culture to another.

    3. One reason people don’t like the word is that it makes them uncomfortable. My response to that: good. That’s the point. We were too comfortable with waste, too comfortable with current reality. We want to stretch people. So if people react to it, I think that is a good and healthy thing, even if they don’t use the word themselves.

    I hope that helps, and thanks for sharing.

    Jamie Flinchbaugh January 15, 2010 at 1:51 pm
  • The formula is okay, but I think we can do better. I think what is missing is D for desired ideal state, or something similar, and S for Supports. We don’t need H, nor need we be concerned with F. Focusing on R is insufficient. Let me explain, if I may.

    The vision has to be something we truly desire, not just an ideal state. It has to be more than where we’re headed; it has to be where we really want to be headed. The vision has to have positive emotional content. We have to care about it, and thus it must contain something we care about.

    With that, I don’t think we need hatred for current reality, just an honest and clear understanding of it, and being able to visualize the gap between it and the desired vision. We need to continually hold in our heads clear mental “pictures” or “images” of both the desired vision and current reality (which is ever changing). This persistence I believe will lead to the taking of not only the first, but of all other steps; in other words, I believe the F in your formula is a natural consequence of the D and of clearly seeing the gap between it and current reality.

    Hatred is a negative feeling and can be stressful and tiring and make one look misanthropic and cranky. Aspiration is a positive feeling and is intrinsically motivating and inspiring; and self-reinforcing. Equally important, hatred focuses us on what we don’t want; whereas aspiration focuses on what we do want.

    I don’t think, as Mark does, that the best visions need S for salesmanship. I think the best visions are co-created and not sold. Selling is manipulation. No need for that if the vision contains something everyone (or at least a critical mass) truly desires. Shared vision is hard, but doable. Selling subtly implies that only leaders can have worthwhile visions (only theirs are important) and that the rest of the organization isn’t “smart” enough to contribute strategically or understand what a desirable future might be, so we have to sell them on ours. It thus shows lack of respect for the rest of the organization. Leaders are a part of the system, not apart from it.

    But we do need, I believe, S for Supports. These supports must be strong enough so that we are not overwhelmed by the gap and the actions needed to close it, nor able to rationalize or otherwise diffuse or get away from it.

    As for a formula greater than resistance — resistance is just a symptom. Its root cause comes from a fear of losing something important.The supports must include countermeasures to those fears. Focusing instead on the symptom will not sustain change. Resistance is compensating feedback from the system trying to maintain its stability. Attempting to overcome resistance (regardless of the formulaic method) just leads in the long term to the system increasing its resistance (to overcome, in your case, H x I x F) and bring it back to where it was before the change initiative.

    Just my perspective.

    Respectfully, Simon Ellberger

    Simon Ellberger January 16, 2010 at 3:07 am
  • The formula is okay, but I think we can do better. I think what is missing is D for desired ideal state, or something similar, and S for Supports. We don’t need H, nor need we be concerned with F. Focusing on R is insufficient. Let me explain, if I may.

    The vision has to be something we truly desire, not just an ideal state. It has to be more than where we’re headed; it has to be where we really want to be headed. The vision has to have positive emotional content. We have to care about it, and thus it must contain something we care about.

    With that, I don’t think we need hatred for current reality, just an honest and clear understanding of it, and being able to visualize the gap between it and the desired vision. We need to continually hold in our heads clear mental “pictures” or “images” of both the desired vision and current reality (which is ever changing). This persistence I believe will lead to the taking of not only the first, but of all other steps; in other words, I believe the F in your formula is a natural consequence of the D and of clearly seeing the gap between it and current reality.

    Hatred is a negative feeling and can be stressful and tiring and make one look misanthropic and cranky. Aspiration is a positive feeling and is intrinsically motivating and inspiring; and self-reinforcing. Equally important, hatred focuses us on what we don’t want; whereas aspiration focuses on what we do want.

    I don’t think, as Mark does, that the best visions need S for salesmanship. I think the best visions are co-created and not sold. Selling is manipulation. No need for that if the vision contains something everyone (or at least a critical mass) truly desires. Shared vision is hard, but doable. Selling subtly implies that only leaders can have worthwhile visions (only theirs are important) and that the rest of the organization isn’t “smart” enough to contribute strategically or understand what a desirable future might be, so we have to sell them on ours. It thus shows lack of respect for the rest of the organization. Leaders are a part of the system, not apart from it.

    But we do need, I believe, S for Supports. These supports must be strong enough so that we are not overwhelmed by the gap and the actions needed to close it, nor able to rationalize or otherwise diffuse or get away from it.

    As for a formula greater than resistance — resistance is just a symptom. Its root cause comes from a fear of losing something important.The supports must include countermeasures to those fears. Focusing instead on the symptom will not sustain change. Resistance is compensating feedback from the system trying to maintain its stability. Attempting to overcome resistance (regardless of the formulaic method) just leads in the long term to the system increasing its resistance (to overcome, in your case, H x I x F) and bring it back to where it was before the change initiative.

    Just my perspective.

    Respectfully, Simon Ellberger

    Simon Ellberger January 16, 2010 at 3:07 am
  • The formula is okay, but I think we can do better. I think what is missing is D for desired ideal state, or something similar, and S for Supports. We don’t need H, nor need we be concerned with F. Focusing on R is insufficient. Let me explain, if I may.

    The vision has to be something we truly desire, not just an ideal state. It has to be more than where we’re headed; it has to be where we really want to be headed. The vision has to have positive emotional content. We have to care about it, and thus it must contain something we care about.

    With that, I don’t think we need hatred for current reality, just an honest and clear understanding of it, and being able to visualize the gap between it and the desired vision. We need to continually hold in our heads clear mental “pictures” or “images” of both the desired vision and current reality (which is ever changing). This persistence I believe will lead to the taking of not only the first, but of all other steps; in other words, I believe the F in your formula is a natural consequence of the D and of clearly seeing the gap between it and current reality.

    Hatred is a negative feeling and can be stressful and tiring and make one look misanthropic and cranky. Aspiration is a positive feeling and is intrinsically motivating and inspiring; and self-reinforcing. Equally important, hatred focuses us on what we don’t want; whereas aspiration focuses on what we do want.

    I don’t think, as Mark does, that the best visions need S for salesmanship. I think the best visions are co-created and not sold. Selling is manipulation. No need for that if the vision contains something everyone (or at least a critical mass) truly desires. Shared vision is hard, but doable. Selling subtly implies that only leaders can have worthwhile visions (only theirs are important) and that the rest of the organization isn’t “smart” enough to contribute strategically or understand what a desirable future might be, so we have to sell them on ours. It thus shows lack of respect for the rest of the organization. Leaders are a part of the system, not apart from it.

    But we do need, I believe, S for Supports. These supports must be strong enough so that we are not overwhelmed by the gap and the actions needed to close it, nor able to rationalize or otherwise diffuse or get away from it.

    As for a formula greater than resistance — resistance is just a symptom. Its root cause comes from a fear of losing something important.The supports must include countermeasures to those fears. Focusing instead on the symptom will not sustain change. Resistance is compensating feedback from the system trying to maintain its stability. Attempting to overcome resistance (regardless of the formulaic method) just leads in the long term to the system increasing its resistance (to overcome, in your case, H x I x F) and bring it back to where it was before the change initiative.

    Just my perspective.

    Respectfully, Simon Ellberger

    Simon Ellberger January 16, 2010 at 3:07 am
  • I agree with the points you are making as far as they are applied, except one. However, the words are just being twisted.

    Of course you need an ideal state that people desire. If they can’t get behind it, then it will die quickly. And I never said that establishing a vision is the domain of the executive, it is one of a leader. A leader is not a job. It is an act. And it can come from any person or persons in the organization that want to move forward.

    You propose S for Support, but what is support if not action. This is what is F for first steps. Your first steps would be ones of support that help people move forward.

    So up to this point I agree with you, but find changing words not necessary. However, you suggest developing a hatred of current reality, or intolerance for the current state, is NOT necessary. I strongly disagreed. If not, people will not give up bad habits, practices, and comforts that keep them where they are today. Consider the research on heart disease. 90 percent of people who have major heart trauma fail to change their behaviors. They aren’t willing to give up their current habits. They are too comfortable with them. Unless at some point you are willing to step out of the comfort zone, it is likely that the current behaviors and habits will balance you back to where you were before.

    Jamie Flinchbaugh January 16, 2010 at 6:41 am
  • I agree with the points you are making as far as they are applied, except one. However, the words are just being twisted.

    Of course you need an ideal state that people desire. If they can’t get behind it, then it will die quickly. And I never said that establishing a vision is the domain of the executive, it is one of a leader. A leader is not a job. It is an act. And it can come from any person or persons in the organization that want to move forward.

    You propose S for Support, but what is support if not action. This is what is F for first steps. Your first steps would be ones of support that help people move forward.

    So up to this point I agree with you, but find changing words not necessary. However, you suggest developing a hatred of current reality, or intolerance for the current state, is NOT necessary. I strongly disagreed. If not, people will not give up bad habits, practices, and comforts that keep them where they are today. Consider the research on heart disease. 90 percent of people who have major heart trauma fail to change their behaviors. They aren’t willing to give up their current habits. They are too comfortable with them. Unless at some point you are willing to step out of the comfort zone, it is likely that the current behaviors and habits will balance you back to where you were before.

    Jamie Flinchbaugh January 16, 2010 at 6:41 am
  • I agree with the points you are making as far as they are applied, except one. However, the words are just being twisted.

    Of course you need an ideal state that people desire. If they can’t get behind it, then it will die quickly. And I never said that establishing a vision is the domain of the executive, it is one of a leader. A leader is not a job. It is an act. And it can come from any person or persons in the organization that want to move forward.

    You propose S for Support, but what is support if not action. This is what is F for first steps. Your first steps would be ones of support that help people move forward.

    So up to this point I agree with you, but find changing words not necessary. However, you suggest developing a hatred of current reality, or intolerance for the current state, is NOT necessary. I strongly disagreed. If not, people will not give up bad habits, practices, and comforts that keep them where they are today. Consider the research on heart disease. 90 percent of people who have major heart trauma fail to change their behaviors. They aren’t willing to give up their current habits. They are too comfortable with them. Unless at some point you are willing to step out of the comfort zone, it is likely that the current behaviors and habits will balance you back to where you were before.

    Jamie Flinchbaugh January 16, 2010 at 6:41 am
  • Jamie: Thanks for taking the time to read and respond to my comment. However, i wish you hadn’t used the phrase “the words are just being twisted” which can be interpreted as malevolence on my part, when none is intended. I have learned a lot from you. I would like to respond to some of your other comments.

    “Of course you need an ideal state that people desire.” Then I think this needs to be explicitly stated. An ideal state like “one-piece flow, zero defects, all work is value-added” is a legitimate ideal state, but it lacks emotional content. I’ve seen lots of statements of an “ideal state” that are similarly devoid of emotion,though worthy in the rational sense.

    “And I never said that establishing a vision is the domain of the executive, it is one of a leader.” And I never said you said that. Everything that I said about a leader and about selling applies no matter from where in the organization that leader resides.

    “A leader is not a job. It is an act. And it can come from any person or persons in the organization that want to move forward.” I agree completely!

    “You propose S for Support, but what is support if not action.” Well, what is creating a vision if not action? My point is that the F is not an independent variable as applied by your formula, or, as stated by you, is not specific enough in meaning.

    “This is what is F for first steps. Your first steps would be ones of support that help people move forward.” I don’t think that follows from what you said. First steps that move people forward need not be ones of support. Perhaps this again is simply a semantic misunderstanding, in which case I suggest more specificity in your definition of F. Anyway, I don’t think it’s necessary to create a safe environment as a first step. It’s just a step that needs to occur somewhere soon in the journey. In fact, first steps can be literally “non-supportive” in that they create dissonance and/or challenge.

    “However, you suggest developing a hatred of current reality, or intolerance for the current state, is NOT necessary.” I didn’t say that developing an intolerance for the current state is not necessary. I specifically objected to the use of the word “hatred.” Hatred and intolerance are quite different. Change your H to an I if you want to use intolerance. However, I think the intolerance comes from seeing the gap between current reality and the desired future. It’s the clear seeing of the gap that’s necessary. It produces the intolerance.

    “If not, people will not give up bad habits, practices, and comforts that keep them where they are today. Consider the research on heart disease. 90 percent of people who have major heart trauma fail to change their behaviors.” You think a hatred of current reality will lead to giving up addictive and habitual behaviors? I disagree strongly. I know several people with major heart trauma and bouts with lung disease who hate dying and hate their current physical debilitation, but can’t give up habits and addictions like smoking, lack of exercise, bad eating, etc.

    Anyone who has an agenda for change, is him/herself also being driven by an unseen “agenda”: an unconscious mindset to maintain stability that has its own agenda. A change of mindset is required. This requires deep reflection and bringing to awareness the hidden agenda. The mental models that are driving the current behavior must be brought to awareness and challenged. This is where support comes in. People need a safe environment in which to be able to discuss and confront the hidden agenda and the concomitant fear.

    “They aren’t willing to give up their current habits.” This assumes that all it takes is willingness. Lots of people are willing to give up bad habits but can’t. We need to get to the root causes of their inability. Attack the process, not the people.

    “They are too comfortable with them.” Disagree again. They can be extremely uncomfortable with them, even frightened of them, yet still not be able to break them.

    “Unless at some point you are willing to step out of the comfort zone, it is likely that the current behaviors and habits will balance you back to where you were before.” I think what is needed is the creation of a new comfort zone that they can safely step into; hence the S for Supports. Thus, they step out of one comfort zone into another, one that moves them forward instead of holding them still.

    Respectfully, Simon

    Simon Ellberger January 16, 2010 at 2:15 pm
  • Jamie: Thanks for taking the time to read and respond to my comment. However, i wish you hadn’t used the phrase “the words are just being twisted” which can be interpreted as malevolence on my part, when none is intended. I have learned a lot from you. I would like to respond to some of your other comments.

    “Of course you need an ideal state that people desire.” Then I think this needs to be explicitly stated. An ideal state like “one-piece flow, zero defects, all work is value-added” is a legitimate ideal state, but it lacks emotional content. I’ve seen lots of statements of an “ideal state” that are similarly devoid of emotion,though worthy in the rational sense.

    “And I never said that establishing a vision is the domain of the executive, it is one of a leader.” And I never said you said that. Everything that I said about a leader and about selling applies no matter from where in the organization that leader resides.

    “A leader is not a job. It is an act. And it can come from any person or persons in the organization that want to move forward.” I agree completely!

    “You propose S for Support, but what is support if not action.” Well, what is creating a vision if not action? My point is that the F is not an independent variable as applied by your formula, or, as stated by you, is not specific enough in meaning.

    “This is what is F for first steps. Your first steps would be ones of support that help people move forward.” I don’t think that follows from what you said. First steps that move people forward need not be ones of support. Perhaps this again is simply a semantic misunderstanding, in which case I suggest more specificity in your definition of F. Anyway, I don’t think it’s necessary to create a safe environment as a first step. It’s just a step that needs to occur somewhere soon in the journey. In fact, first steps can be literally “non-supportive” in that they create dissonance and/or challenge.

    “However, you suggest developing a hatred of current reality, or intolerance for the current state, is NOT necessary.” I didn’t say that developing an intolerance for the current state is not necessary. I specifically objected to the use of the word “hatred.” Hatred and intolerance are quite different. Change your H to an I if you want to use intolerance. However, I think the intolerance comes from seeing the gap between current reality and the desired future. It’s the clear seeing of the gap that’s necessary. It produces the intolerance.

    “If not, people will not give up bad habits, practices, and comforts that keep them where they are today. Consider the research on heart disease. 90 percent of people who have major heart trauma fail to change their behaviors.” You think a hatred of current reality will lead to giving up addictive and habitual behaviors? I disagree strongly. I know several people with major heart trauma and bouts with lung disease who hate dying and hate their current physical debilitation, but can’t give up habits and addictions like smoking, lack of exercise, bad eating, etc.

    Anyone who has an agenda for change, is him/herself also being driven by an unseen “agenda”: an unconscious mindset to maintain stability that has its own agenda. A change of mindset is required. This requires deep reflection and bringing to awareness the hidden agenda. The mental models that are driving the current behavior must be brought to awareness and challenged. This is where support comes in. People need a safe environment in which to be able to discuss and confront the hidden agenda and the concomitant fear.

    “They aren’t willing to give up their current habits.” This assumes that all it takes is willingness. Lots of people are willing to give up bad habits but can’t. We need to get to the root causes of their inability. Attack the process, not the people.

    “They are too comfortable with them.” Disagree again. They can be extremely uncomfortable with them, even frightened of them, yet still not be able to break them.

    “Unless at some point you are willing to step out of the comfort zone, it is likely that the current behaviors and habits will balance you back to where you were before.” I think what is needed is the creation of a new comfort zone that they can safely step into; hence the S for Supports. Thus, they step out of one comfort zone into another, one that moves them forward instead of holding them still.

    Respectfully, Simon

    Simon Ellberger January 16, 2010 at 2:15 pm
  • Jamie: Thanks for taking the time to read and respond to my comment. However, i wish you hadn’t used the phrase “the words are just being twisted” which can be interpreted as malevolence on my part, when none is intended. I have learned a lot from you. I would like to respond to some of your other comments.

    “Of course you need an ideal state that people desire.” Then I think this needs to be explicitly stated. An ideal state like “one-piece flow, zero defects, all work is value-added” is a legitimate ideal state, but it lacks emotional content. I’ve seen lots of statements of an “ideal state” that are similarly devoid of emotion,though worthy in the rational sense.

    “And I never said that establishing a vision is the domain of the executive, it is one of a leader.” And I never said you said that. Everything that I said about a leader and about selling applies no matter from where in the organization that leader resides.

    “A leader is not a job. It is an act. And it can come from any person or persons in the organization that want to move forward.” I agree completely!

    “You propose S for Support, but what is support if not action.” Well, what is creating a vision if not action? My point is that the F is not an independent variable as applied by your formula, or, as stated by you, is not specific enough in meaning.

    “This is what is F for first steps. Your first steps would be ones of support that help people move forward.” I don’t think that follows from what you said. First steps that move people forward need not be ones of support. Perhaps this again is simply a semantic misunderstanding, in which case I suggest more specificity in your definition of F. Anyway, I don’t think it’s necessary to create a safe environment as a first step. It’s just a step that needs to occur somewhere soon in the journey. In fact, first steps can be literally “non-supportive” in that they create dissonance and/or challenge.

    “However, you suggest developing a hatred of current reality, or intolerance for the current state, is NOT necessary.” I didn’t say that developing an intolerance for the current state is not necessary. I specifically objected to the use of the word “hatred.” Hatred and intolerance are quite different. Change your H to an I if you want to use intolerance. However, I think the intolerance comes from seeing the gap between current reality and the desired future. It’s the clear seeing of the gap that’s necessary. It produces the intolerance.

    “If not, people will not give up bad habits, practices, and comforts that keep them where they are today. Consider the research on heart disease. 90 percent of people who have major heart trauma fail to change their behaviors.” You think a hatred of current reality will lead to giving up addictive and habitual behaviors? I disagree strongly. I know several people with major heart trauma and bouts with lung disease who hate dying and hate their current physical debilitation, but can’t give up habits and addictions like smoking, lack of exercise, bad eating, etc.

    Anyone who has an agenda for change, is him/herself also being driven by an unseen “agenda”: an unconscious mindset to maintain stability that has its own agenda. A change of mindset is required. This requires deep reflection and bringing to awareness the hidden agenda. The mental models that are driving the current behavior must be brought to awareness and challenged. This is where support comes in. People need a safe environment in which to be able to discuss and confront the hidden agenda and the concomitant fear.

    “They aren’t willing to give up their current habits.” This assumes that all it takes is willingness. Lots of people are willing to give up bad habits but can’t. We need to get to the root causes of their inability. Attack the process, not the people.

    “They are too comfortable with them.” Disagree again. They can be extremely uncomfortable with them, even frightened of them, yet still not be able to break them.

    “Unless at some point you are willing to step out of the comfort zone, it is likely that the current behaviors and habits will balance you back to where you were before.” I think what is needed is the creation of a new comfort zone that they can safely step into; hence the S for Supports. Thus, they step out of one comfort zone into another, one that moves them forward instead of holding them still.

    Respectfully, Simon

    Simon Ellberger January 16, 2010 at 2:15 pm
  • Simon, but twisting words doesn’t have to be malevolent. If I had thought you were trying to be, I assure you I wouldn’t have spent any time responding.

    I won’t response point by point, because I think we’ve both made ours. Just two things. Obviously I could have expanded on my points. For example, ideal state. Yes, of course it needs to be well done. I could have turned this into a 30 minute course on just that point. So I think it’s not so much that I’m wrong, just that it’s incomplete. Very incomplete.

    You do put some assumptions in my mouth that isn’t there. I never said that willingness is ALL that it takes to change a behavior or habit. Obviously not. It requires a whole bunch of things. But if we aren’t even willing, the rest is moot.

    If you prefer the word intolerance, that’s fine, as I’ve already stated in my original message. If they mean different things to you, that’s also fine. To many, when it comes to what ACTION does the word apply, there is no difference. The definition of hatred is “intense dislike.” Intolerance is essentially “not allowing” something different than your own view. I actually find intolerant a MORE negative word that hatred. But either way, the actions you would take on it are the same, and that’s what really matters.

    Jamie Flinchbaugh January 16, 2010 at 4:25 pm
  • Simon, but twisting words doesn’t have to be malevolent. If I had thought you were trying to be, I assure you I wouldn’t have spent any time responding.

    I won’t response point by point, because I think we’ve both made ours. Just two things. Obviously I could have expanded on my points. For example, ideal state. Yes, of course it needs to be well done. I could have turned this into a 30 minute course on just that point. So I think it’s not so much that I’m wrong, just that it’s incomplete. Very incomplete.

    You do put some assumptions in my mouth that isn’t there. I never said that willingness is ALL that it takes to change a behavior or habit. Obviously not. It requires a whole bunch of things. But if we aren’t even willing, the rest is moot.

    If you prefer the word intolerance, that’s fine, as I’ve already stated in my original message. If they mean different things to you, that’s also fine. To many, when it comes to what ACTION does the word apply, there is no difference. The definition of hatred is “intense dislike.” Intolerance is essentially “not allowing” something different than your own view. I actually find intolerant a MORE negative word that hatred. But either way, the actions you would take on it are the same, and that’s what really matters.

    Jamie Flinchbaugh January 16, 2010 at 4:25 pm
  • Simon, but twisting words doesn’t have to be malevolent. If I had thought you were trying to be, I assure you I wouldn’t have spent any time responding.

    I won’t response point by point, because I think we’ve both made ours. Just two things. Obviously I could have expanded on my points. For example, ideal state. Yes, of course it needs to be well done. I could have turned this into a 30 minute course on just that point. So I think it’s not so much that I’m wrong, just that it’s incomplete. Very incomplete.

    You do put some assumptions in my mouth that isn’t there. I never said that willingness is ALL that it takes to change a behavior or habit. Obviously not. It requires a whole bunch of things. But if we aren’t even willing, the rest is moot.

    If you prefer the word intolerance, that’s fine, as I’ve already stated in my original message. If they mean different things to you, that’s also fine. To many, when it comes to what ACTION does the word apply, there is no difference. The definition of hatred is “intense dislike.” Intolerance is essentially “not allowing” something different than your own view. I actually find intolerant a MORE negative word that hatred. But either way, the actions you would take on it are the same, and that’s what really matters.

    Jamie Flinchbaugh January 16, 2010 at 4:25 pm
  • Fascinating, Jamie- I had forgotten you are so articulate! Great web site and blog, too- a total “class act” package….

    I loved seeing your invitation (at the end of the video) to suggest other topics for you to consider addressing … so, how about tips for negative thinking (“resistant”?) people to become more positive thinking? -And for investigative sorts of people to become more action-oriented rather than ending up so often in analysis paralysis- searching for answers to endless questions? Those are some of my especial challenges…. Or do you prefer to focus on more macro-organizational learning topics? (Since your blurb mentions that you help individuals as well as companies, I thought I’d just ask, anyway- figured it couldn’t hurt!)

    Thanks much!

    Judy Stitt January 22, 2010 at 1:56 am
  • Fascinating, Jamie- I had forgotten you are so articulate! Great web site and blog, too- a total “class act” package….

    I loved seeing your invitation (at the end of the video) to suggest other topics for you to consider addressing … so, how about tips for negative thinking (“resistant”?) people to become more positive thinking? -And for investigative sorts of people to become more action-oriented rather than ending up so often in analysis paralysis- searching for answers to endless questions? Those are some of my especial challenges…. Or do you prefer to focus on more macro-organizational learning topics? (Since your blurb mentions that you help individuals as well as companies, I thought I’d just ask, anyway- figured it couldn’t hurt!)

    Thanks much!

    Judy Stitt January 22, 2010 at 1:56 am
  • Fascinating, Jamie- I had forgotten you are so articulate! Great web site and blog, too- a total “class act” package….

    I loved seeing your invitation (at the end of the video) to suggest other topics for you to consider addressing … so, how about tips for negative thinking (“resistant”?) people to become more positive thinking? -And for investigative sorts of people to become more action-oriented rather than ending up so often in analysis paralysis- searching for answers to endless questions? Those are some of my especial challenges…. Or do you prefer to focus on more macro-organizational learning topics? (Since your blurb mentions that you help individuals as well as companies, I thought I’d just ask, anyway- figured it couldn’t hurt!)

    Thanks much!

    Judy Stitt January 22, 2010 at 1:56 am
  • Thanks Judith. I’ll put those on my idea list.

    Jamie Flinchbaugh January 22, 2010 at 8:50 am
  • Thanks Judith. I’ll put those on my idea list.

    Jamie Flinchbaugh January 22, 2010 at 8:50 am
  • Thanks Judith. I’ll put those on my idea list.

    Jamie Flinchbaugh January 22, 2010 at 8:50 am