🧝 ✨ 👩🏾‍💼 Are you going to change? Think again 👆🏼 🉐 🧕🏼

The wackiest thing in the world is to change. It gives unusually strong emotions, on the one hand, and on the other, it can completely emasculate, empty, deprive friends and even your favorite work.

I'll tell you a couple of stories. I do not pretend to truth in the highest instance, of course.

Change with colleagues

I’m talking about real changes, and not about the introduction of techniques, the transition to a new CRM-ku or task manager. The real ones are when people start to work differently, and the result of their activity is radically improved.

Changes quickly squander the “bank account” of relations, moreover, with subordinate, parallel, and higher ones. Here is simple math: if you manage to accumulate a balance of relations, then you spend it until the overdraft, and if you do not have time, then you work on credit. And the loan has a limit.

For example, one dude wanted to change the work of a team of programmers. He knew exactly what to do, preliminary showed that his plan worked (on a different sample). Well i.e. take the finished case and use it. The exhaust for the team is simple: more results with the same efforts, and more money in your pocket.

The debit balance was enough for two weeks, then work went on credit. Crescent worked on the proposed scheme, received a noticeable improvement. But she strained the need to work according to someone else's scheme, and gradually she outweighed it. For the second half of the month we worked already on credit of relations, like an Italian strike - like, we do what you say, but the further you go, the longer you lower your sleeves.

The result: a broken relationship, with a clearly positive result, even in the first month. Well, of course, they kicked out the “traitor” and returned to the previous scheme and previous results.

Change with the owner

The same story with the direct beneficiary, i.e. beneficiary of changes. There was one dude who took up the changes in the office on the instructions of the owner. It started wonderfully - received a full carte blanche and almost unlimited resources. Figachil, how much halva. And very quickly flooded.

Well, stupidly, profit began to grow, although work was not carried out directly with its components, but with supporting processes. But they, as it turned out, influenced profits so strongly and quickly that their heads were spinning with success. At the owner.

The dude understood that he was doing everything right, and he just needed to not go blunt and continue. And the owner fell into the trap of "well that's it, now he’ll trample on his own." And he began to make his proposals.

At the very beginning, he was silent, taking the position "do at least something, I finally do not know what to do." And when I saw, and partly understood the process of change, suddenly, out of nowhere, I remembered what I read in books.

At first, gently, like, just to offer, let's discuss something like this. Well, dude discussed, explained why you shouldn’t do that. But the farther, the more the owner began to believe that his ideas were worth something, and they also needed to be used.

It got to the point that the dude said: no, you are offering bullshit, the owner. You set me to make changes, so I do. What do you think the owner answered? About "I'll give you *** right now." A minute later, of course, he apologized, but the late guy clicked already.

The dude was stubborn, and continued to bend his line. Just stopped explaining what he was doing. And about a month later he was removed from this job. And then it was fun.

It was removed from the management of the entire project of changes, but was not excluded from the team of this project. The leader was put in another person, with directly opposite views on life. Our dude came up with what to do and did. And the new leader was only able to do.

They gathered and asked the dude: say what you need to do. And he told them: you tell me this, and I will do it. Or turn back. Well, word for word, the duo quit, and the draft changes were covered with a copper basin.

In the end: not just folding, but the rollback of changes, the decline in company performance at times, spoiled relationships, loss of faith in change.

Change all the way

But miracles do happen. When the change implementer works alone and goes all the way. One acquaintance reformed the supply service, it included a warehouse and purchasers.

At first, he succumbed to the illusion that everyone around him - friends and like-minded people, would help him in every way, with ideas, facts, and hands. But, fortunately, he quickly realized that one needed to change.

In general, he spat and said: I’ll do everything myself. The owner, in the sense, said. He shook his head, let’s say, tell me what you’ll do, specifically, the plan, charter, events, resources, etc. And he rested and that's it: either himself, or nothing.

The owner thought for the weekend, and decided: okay, do not care. Well, I gave carte blanche. And did not climb.
Well, the guy did everything himself. The process reconfigured, automated, changed the motivation system, accompanied, supported, etc. The account of relations with all involved colleagues, including the owner, went into a tough minus. Probably, he did not reach the credit limit of relations with the owner, because the process of changes was managed to be completed.

And then a miracle happened. Well, firstly, the project itself was implemented successfully. And secondly, those who hated him dramatically changed their attitude - they began to drag them around in their arms. Well, why - the guy saved them from the eternal jambs, for which they were used to raking, and their salary increased, and, in general, they became heroes. Just because the remaining services have problems, but these services have disappeared.

In total, it turns out that if you endure an extremely low level of relations in the process of changes, then at the output this level can grow much higher than the initial one. True, if the changes bring good results.

Change with friends

But this is the most stupid undertaking, because she kills friendship for nothing if one wants, and the second does not. Changes in this sense are like a test, like the campaign proposed by Vysotsky with a friend in the mountains.

If “the gloom was angry but went”, the level of relations temporarily fell, but the person treats this adequately, understands that it IS NECESSARY. And it goes.

And if “immediately turned sour and - down”, or “stumbled - and shouted”, then the balance of relations was initially very low, or they went uphill too steeply.

There were two friends guys who were trying to do IT business. Both concluded that changes needed to be made. Not to say that it’s serious - to expand the product line dramatically, change approaches to customers, and optimize project activities. The essence and purpose of the changes was both understood and accepted by both.

But, alas, change is not only the essence and purpose, but also work. Changes must be made, like any other job. Not only dream of hiking in the mountains, but also crawl up, fall, freeze, starve and lack oxygen.

Well, one of them seemed to endure, and the second was "turned down and down." Well, sort of, and don't care - you can just roll back the changes and wait for a more favorable moment. But the relationship is already ruined, and the business rested on them. Well, the business is over.

Total, there is no business, friendship turned into passive hostility and mutual accusations.

The army of "convinced"

Most of the guys who are trying to deal with change, can not stand the fall in the level of relations. They can’t live in a state where "everyone has begun to feel worse about me."

A decrease in the level of relations overshadows the goal of change, and the benefits that are predicted or even promised - for example, increased income or position. We are social beings. Thanks to the brain default system, which dramatically raises the priority of current relationships over distant goals.

But the trick is different. Those who started the changes and abandoned see a contradiction that does not give them rest: I returned the relationship to a good level, and I am now well done, but I threw the change, so I'm not done. We must still decide whether you are well done or not.

They say that at this moment consciousness turns on - it is it that is responsible for eliminating contradictions, because does not want to live with them. And here the choice is simple - either admit that you are dependent on relationships, and you are well done only when you are well treated, or the very idea of change is called evil.

So the army of "convinced" is replenished - those who "realized" that change is nonsense. In this army, it is customary to humor a lot about “effective” managers, cobblers, nouveau riche, info-gypsy, politicians, sloppies, etc. - all those who are directly or indirectly related to the topic of change.

As a result, such a "convinced" almost never returns to the idea of venturing change. Just because he is afraid to again experience the difficulties of losing relationships, and to experience a contradiction.

Change with strangers

The most practicable option that I have seen is to start changing when the relationship is either not yet formed or is already ruined (including deliberately). Simply put, when there is nothing to lose.

The only thing is that you need to have a credit of trust from some decision maker. And remember that this loan decreases very quickly.

Next, simple mathematics works: changes should bring results faster than the balance in the relationship account decreases. The easiest option is to start with small changes that are noticeable in time. Make a small project that will quickly show the result.

It is like an investment with a short return period. You give away the rest of the relationship, you sit "without money", but very quickly return everything back with interest. As a result, both the balance is higher than the initial one, and the overdraft limit is increased - the decision maker already knows what you can and will suffer longer the next time.

Now you can begin more extensive changes. But to remember that they should bring results in the foreseeable future is still worth it. As well as the rate of decrease in relations.

You just need to understand: the essence of the changes is not clear to everyone around. The results are clear. Losses and difficulties in the process are understandable. And what are you doing there, and why exactly this is not clear.

While there is no result, everyone sees only the difficulties and problems that you create. Explaining your actions also makes little sense - it can happen, as in the story with the owner. Well, in principle, the motivation for your actions can be understood only by those who work directly with you, who understand current and global goals. Pain, in short.

Total, the principle is simple. We hammer in relations with everyone, including decision-makers, for a short period. We do not spend time restoring these relations until the changes have brought results. We focus on the successful implementation of the changes.

The faster the result is obtained, at least intermediate, but understandable by the decision-maker and others, the faster the return on investment with interest. Or at least cashback.