Blog

I recently returned from my honeymoon in New Zealand.  Everywhere we went the toilets I encountered had two buttons on the top of them to instigate flushing instead of the one lever I am accustomed to seeing in the USA.  The two buttons were always distinct by way of some type of unique drawing or design on them - I didn’t know what they meant but someone was trying to tell me something.

Having ample opportunities for experimentation on a three week trip I tried them both on various occasions.  Sometimes the left one and sometimes the right.  Both flushed the toilet and without a noticeable difference.  My new wife and I had a couple quick conversations about the differences but, not being the ideal honeymoon conversation, I didn’t pursue it in much depth.  I did intend to ask natives about the differences, though, and never remembered at an appropriate time.

After three weeks you can imagine that I returned to a substantial mail pile.  After sorting through the requisite bills and junkmail, I was able to relax with my coveted arrivals…my magazines.  One of these was the Dec/Jan issue of Fast Company.

In an article titled “Feeding the Beast:  Sustainability is about more than eco-friendly burger boxes” John Ehrenfeld writes the following:

Such products exist today. My favorite example is the two-button toilet, still a rarity in the United States but increasingly popular in Northern Europe and New Zealand. In place of the usual single lever or button, the toilet offers two buttons or levers, one small and one large, actuating a smaller or larger flush volume. Beyond its obvious “green” credentials, this toilet actually forces users to engage with it on more than a utilitarian level, and to make a choice. It creates presence in place of mindlessness.

The timing was unbelievable.  After I got over the shock of coincidence, I was able to fully absorb John’s message.  Companies that simply give us ‘green’, although well intentioned, may not be having the impact they appear to be having.  Take cars that are more fuel-efficient - they’ve been shown to promote more consumption.  In order to make real progress we must involve people in the process.

Providing products that themselves are more efficient is only addressing one part of the problem - we must create points for interaction that force people to participate, allow them to make decisions and show them the impact of their choice.  This is a systems issue, where addressing one part of the problem won’t make it go away - the entire system that it operates in must be addressed.

This is the value of including elements of systems thinking and action learning in leadership/employee development programs.  In many development courses participants are just given tools - tools that have been successful with their peers or with other companies as ‘best practices.’

Programs that provide tools and then force participants to analyze the situation, scrutinize the tools, predict their impact and monitor results (a la action learning) are proven to make sustainable changes in people’s behavior and mindsets.  Including pieces on systems thinking forces participants to think through the potential results of a variety of actions.

It is only through these comprehensive methods that companies will enjoy lasting development.  So whether you’re trying to save the world or just improve the abilities of your workforce keep in mind that giving people the tools to do it isn’t enough - they need the chance to interact, make choices and see the impact of their choice - whether it’s a flush or a change in strategy.