|
Making assumptions explicit. My first exposure to PSG was when I was still an executive of a state agency. PSG had been hired to help design the merger of a state’s community college, technical school, and university systems. Suffice it to say, these were three very separate systems – and no one experienced that more than students.
Asked to be one of the designers, I will always remember the design process’s kick-off. During our very first moments together, we designers were asked
- What assumptions do you hold about this merger?
- What assumptions do you hold about post-secondary learning?
- What assumptions do you hold about the future of colleges in post-secondary education?
Each of us was asked to chart our assumptions and post the flipcharts for all to see. Then from across all, we had to nominate those assumptions that we wanted kept to guide the design work ahead.
It was amazing how we differed in our assumptions – and surprisingly, how few were ultimately kept. The ones we wrestled with the most included our assumptions about how learning takes place - and whether campuses (and buildings) do or do not contribute to learning.
The ultimate design contained ideas PSG’s client never expected – most, from the point of view of the student. Yet aspects of the unexpected ideas live on today, such as a learning connection that informs future students of career and life opportunities. And easy transferability of credits – as well as learning that prepared them - for students who move from school to school.
The learning I took away from this experience was how stating our assumptions out loud jump-started the whole process, preventing a lot of “disappointments” among each other later.
Turning assumptions “on their head.” One trick that has been invaluable in our client work is to invert whatever question is on the table. The example that always comes to mind is work with a state that was paralyzed in its ability to bring its property tax system to equity. This meant that equal properties sitting side by side were paying very different levels of tax – and people were irate. But every time the state’s leaders thought about moving toward equity, they were stymied by the cost of doing so – for instance, the cost of new assessments of so many individual properties.
Almost in frustration we asked, “What’s the cost of continued inequity?” One of their staff took the question seriously. By calculating the much higher cost of the status quo – the continued appeals, challenges, and court cases - they were able to articulate the case for change – and frankly, get past their own assumptions.
Assumptions lie beneath every action - or inaction. Individuals hold them. Individual programs carry their own assumptions based on past practice – how the money can be used, how the process must play out. (I still smile about the “temporary” sales tax that was put in place in Minnesota in 1967. Those “temporary” processes were used for 25 years before undergoing a total re-examination. By that time, we decided maybe the tax was going to permanent!) Similarly every day, the culture of whole organizations sends unmistakable signals about how we do things around here.
Some beliefs and practices are useful; many are not. Some you’d want to keep; some not. But you know what? It’s important to make implicit assumptions explicit.
My challenge for you this month is to have some fun - and ask people to state your organization’s unwritten rules. We have found that people are very able to name them. Then decide if you want them kept or tossed.
Challenge a few assumptions today!
|
