What JFK and George Carlin Teach Us about Change

Just because two people use the same exact word, do not assume that they mean the same exact thing. As a consultant I find myself interrupting discussions fairly often by saying something like “Wait a minute. When you say ____, I think you mean ____. Is that what you mean when you use that term?” It’s amazing how well this technique brings misunderstanding to light. Not only does this question help clarify the term at hand, it also makes the participants of the meeting aware of the diversity in the room. We begin to talk about different points of view, and we ask more questions of each other when a new idea emerges. We go on guard against ambiguity and fine tune our topic until there is a specificity that we believe will be equally well understood by others who are not present in the current meeting. As a result we use language that is much more precise than when we first sat down.

Specificity is particularly important when defining a change initiative's desired outcome – the unambiguous criteria for success. One of the best examples of communicating a specific desired outcome is President Kennedy’s 1961 speech to a joint session of congress, where he launched the space race with the Soviet Union:

I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth. – John F. Kennedy, May 25, 1961

Kennedy used but 31 words to specify his bold criteria for success. In a world yet to know home computers, cell phones, microwave ovens, handheld calculators, space shuttles, or even American astronauts, the audacity of his goal for a manned lunar landing and safe return within 9 years’ time is incomprehensible to most of us now in the 21st century. It’s almost laughable. It took a year of internal debate before NASA even finalized how such a journey should be accomplished. The money spent to advance science and technology to meet this goal was about $23 billion, which is more like $230 billion in today’s economy. This endeavor, now commonly called the biggest technological achievement in the history of the human race, captured the attention and imagination of a generation. There was never a popular song written about the space shuttle or the Hubble telescope or the international space station, but we will always have our Rocket Man and Major Tom to remember the race to the moon. A generation lost in space, indeed.

It all started with a 31 word desired outcome. Ironically, this concise statement was part of a 5,800 word speech that outlined a variety of new initiatives and goals for the United States, and from my reading no goal was articulated so precisely as the moon mission. My guess is that Kennedy wanted the congress (and the country) to commit to nothing less than this dramatic outcome because he knew that obstacles might lead to cuts and scale backs. He wanted a big splash - well, splash down - to restore the world's confidence in democracy even as communism was becoming more prevalent. Look at this excerpt from the same speech:

I believe we should go to the moon. But I think every citizen of this country as well as the Members of the Congress should consider the matter carefully in making their judgment, to which we have given attention over many weeks and months, because it is a heavy burden, and there is no sense in agreeing or desiring that the United States take an affirmative position in outer space, unless we are prepared to do the work and bear the burdens to make it successful. If we are not, we should decide today and this year. This decision demands a major national commitment of scientific and technical manpower, material and facilities, and the possibility of their diversion from other important activities where they are already thinly spread. It means a degree of dedication, organization and discipline which have not always characterized our research and development efforts. It means we cannot afford undue work stoppages, inflated costs of material or talent, wasteful interagency rivalries, or a high turnover of key personnel.

Note that this part of the speech does not demand that citizens and the congress blindly commit, but that they consider whether they will commit. Going to the moon was not a change mandate, but a change request. As we know the country did commit, and the outcome was achieved on July 20, 1969—when Neil Armstrong and Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin walked on the moon while Michael Collins remained in lunar orbit—through July 24, 1969 when the three astronauts safely splashed down in the Pacific Ocean. Mission accomplished. One might argue that the costs were too high or that the value provided did not merit the investment, but no one can deny that we achieved the desired outcome. You need to have that same level of specificity, the clearly understood definition of success, when you are planning to change a group, organization, or community.

What Do You Mean by Change?

I put a dollar in one of those change machines. Nothing changed. – George Carlin

Unfortunately, “change” is a term that most of us use in a very sloppy fashion. Often we do not include an object of the change, as in phrases like “change is hard.” Changing what is hard? It was not so difficult to change from telephones with dials to ones with buttons. It was not so painful to move from manual transmissions to automatic transmissions in cars. Are people kicking and screaming about tablet computers, which have neither an external keyboard nor a DVD drive? Clearly some changes are decidedly easy for us to adapt to.

Maybe you have heard the phrase “we have to change to survive.” Change what? If you are talking about bodily adaptations to viruses, then I guess this is a true statement. However, my neighbors who do not have cable or satellite TV seem to be getting along okay. Actually, one still has dial-up internet service, meaning they must use their phone line to receive emails or access the web—the horror! I had to remind my computer engineering friends that when new operating systems and software are released, my 10 year old computer still turns on and runs the old applications I purchased. The Amish people in the US and the African tribes isolated from present day society prove that it is possible for people to survive while actively trying not to change. Clearly some changes are not as necessary as we are led to believe. You have to be careful to specify what it is that you intend to change.

Even when we do speak of changing something, we are often vague or conceptual. Maybe we discuss “changing people’s attitudes” or “changing the culture.” One problem here is that it is difficult to judge when attitudes or cultures have changed or have changed enough. There can easily be disagreements about how to measure the change. Worse than this, using abstract terms allows different individuals to make different interpretations and, therefore, triggers a collapse in goal alignment. Individuals start shooting at diverse targets, and even though each member might feel like he or she is supporting the effort, the reality is that the coordination is breaking down.

So, when you endeavor to "create change" in a group large or small, take some time to consider the specifics:

• What is the behavior or status that you want to change? Can it be visualized consistently by others?
• What is the clear definition of success? How would another leader know if your goal was achieved?
• What outcomes might approximate your desired outcome, but should be deemed unacceptable?
• What is the target date for completion? Is that date challenging, but acceptable to others?
• Did you create time for dialog about accepting the goal? Did you publically list obstacles and politics that will need to be overcome?
• Did you schedule time in your process for individuals to determine how they should contribute to the collective goal? How will this stage start, be revised, and be completed?

Perhaps not immediately, but eventually, others will need to see how their change in behavior links to the ultimate outcome that you are seeking to attain. If you use fuzzy language to define desired outcomes, you will end up with the same result that George Carlin did – nothing changed. Get it right, and the moon is yours.



This content is protected by the 1976 Copyright Protection Act of the United States of America. The proper citation for this blog is as follows: Mastrangelo, P. M. (date posted). Title of Post. The First Domino, available at http://the-first-domino.blogspot.com. This post is not intended to represent any person or organization other than Paul M. Mastrangelo.