Big change? Or small change?

Whenever I’m faced with change - technological or organisational change, not a surplus of coinage - I’m drawn back to one of my favourite authors/commentators on new technology, Neil Postman.  He has a mantra which I have adopted and used far beyond the confines of technology.  It works just as well in other areas - including dealing with politicians.  

Whenever confronted by change he asks the question; What is the problem to which X is the solution? - X being the proposed change.  You can then have a lot of fun with this by using the answer as the new problem and go round the loop again.  It frustrates the hell out of Anniemay when I ask, “what is the problem to which a new sofa is the solution?”  Because more often that not, the eventual answer lies a long way from the original problem.

One of my favourite examples was one he posed to the American car industry; “What is the problem to which the electric window is the solution?”  He was asking this question some years ago now but it illustrates the point; the answer would be something along the lines “it makes it easier for the driver to wind down the window”.  Fair enough - but then he would follow up with “what is the problem to which making the window easier to wind down is the solution…..?” And so on.  Eventually he demonstrates that the answer had nothing to do with making life easier for the driver; electric windows were simply cheaper to manufacture than mechanical windows.  The change was for the benefit of the manufacturer, not the customer.

Now this might seem a fairly trivial, even outdated thing to ponder on.  But it has its uses.  Ask a politician “what is the problem, to which closing down libraries is the solution?”   And see what you get.  Or insert problem of choice.  And there’s a downside to electric windows.  

In France many years ago, my Citroen BX (an electronic marvel) stalled at a busy junction in the middle of La Rochelle.  The car would not restart.  It was midday.  It was hot; all the windows were down.  I pushed the car, with a bit of help, across three lanes of traffic to the side of the street.  A phone call to the local garage confirmed that it was lunch time and that they’d be with me in a couple of hours.  

I couldn’t lock the car.  I couldn’t close the windows.  It was a busy street and the car was packed with stuff and I felt I couldn’t leave it.  Perhaps I could have done - who knows?  But at that time I didn’t. So I stood guard in the heat for nearly 2 hours until le mechanic had finished his lunch.  It turned out to be a couple of dead battery cells.  A small thing really - but that technological change which required me to do nothing more than press a button in order to wave my hand in the breeze, was enough to render the car vulnerable and immobile.

If Neil Postman was a blipper, he might ask; “what is the problem to which a complete redesign is the solution?”  That’s a tough one, so he might start with a simple question; “what is the problem to which a white background is the solution?”  The answers will be something along the lines; “it’s what blippers want….” or “to make life better for blippers….”  If you read some of the comments on the Blip Blog you’ll realise this simply won’t wash with many people here.  Me included.

I’m not against change; far from it.  I spent over 20 years working in educational multimedia production.  So I have experience of things like website design - what works and what doesn’t work.  But most of all I want to be sure that any change really is for my benefit if that’s how it’s being sold.


Just my 2 cents worth.